hearing beleeved and were Baptized Acts 22.16 c. But if Nayler from that expression Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach will argue against Baptisme he will fully make voyd the expresse commands of Christ for Baptizing and charge sinne upon the Apostles practice so that in stead of crying downe expounding Scriptures we leave him to study what that expression meaneth Excep For the outward signes of the Supper doe this in remembrance of me till I come but when he was come then the Bread which they did breake was the Body of Christ Reply 1 We cannot but be amazed at his grosse perverting Scripture but we have showne the false meaning of that expression till he come in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 29. The Lords Supper an Ordinance to the end of the vvorld That those Corinthians to whom Paul wrote and commands to use that Ordinance Doe this in remembrance of me till the comming of Christ c. were those in whom he was spiritually come before 1 Cor. 1.2 Yet notwithstanding that spirituall comming they were commanded to eate of the Bread and drinks of the Cup to shew forth the Lords death 1 Cor. 11.26 till he come that is not till his spirituall comming in the worke of grace that was past before but his comming in glory 2. The life of saints here is a life of Faith Heb. 10.38 the just shall live by his Faith Now for the nourishing and strengthning of Faith he hath left the Seales of Bread and Wine as the holders forth of his Body and Blood for Faith to act it selfe upon and therefore before Faith be swallowed up in vision these are appointed as standing Ordinances by the Lord Iesus for the establishing of it The rest of his answer is made up of such rayling in stead of reasoning and such inconsistent expressions that we shall onely leave him to the Lord to deale with his conscience for the guilt of them Position 17. That there is no mediate Call to the Ministry He denyes not our proofe and in stead of answering the many Scripture arguments we gave in our Perfect Pharisee pag. 32. for a mediate call to the Ministry he falls to a downe-right rayling though we have nothing we need to add to the arguments we there layd down against this Position meeting with no answer to what we have written yet we shall observe in the midst of his raylings these things Naylers contradictions 1. How flatly he contradicts himselfe when he tells the Reader pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles when they had gathered Churches out of the world they ordained them Elders of themselves yet after sayes l. 10. 11. these were ordained not by man and after l. 13. 14. this ordination was not by man nor by the Churches c. the Apostles ordained them Elders and yet those Elders were not ordained by man were not the Apostles men And was not this a mediate call wherein the Apostles ordained them Elders in every City Acts 14.23 2. Though he labâ—urs with abundance of bitternesse to cry downe any mediate call yet as he answers nothing to our Scriptures so we cannot but 〈◊〉 â—ve how he is forced in the midst of his rayling to confesse the truth saying pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles ordained them Elders which is that mediate call we contended for Lastly The substance of his rayling is to tell us that we are invested in the Ministry by Magistrates Townes and Parishes when as we doe professe we doe not know a Minister in England that is ordained or professeth to receive his ordination from a Magistrate Towne or Parish 2. All that the Magistrate Towne or Parish doe is to provide maintenance for thâ—se that labour in the Gospel nay the late Commission which perhaps Nayler drives at never pretended to put any in the Office of a Minister but onely provided maintenance for him in the propogation of the Gospel so that notwithstanding what he hath said we are still fully convinced of the clearenesse of a mediate call to the worke of publique Ministry of the Word And thuâ— we have followed him in every materiall expression though â—e answers nothing to our Scriptures or Arguments And though his great cavill be at our testimonies and upon this cryes out 〈◊〉 we published filthy lyes yet the Reader will now clearely see that of 55. proofes we layd downe he onely denyes the truth of seven which are yet fully cleared and proved either by the testimony of these that were the witnesses under their Hands and Seales or by the demonstration out of their owne Books however Nayler labours to evade and shuffle them How unjustly we have been charged with lyes will now appeare and we must seriously professe that had it not been to cleare up those truths which he chargeth with falsehood and vindicating Scripture from his grosse perverting of them his Booke is so meerely composed of rayling and abusing us and so beyond expectation sottish and senselesse that we should not have thought it at all worth our answer or observation Were we not ready according to that rule 1 Pet. 3.15 to give a reason of the hope that is in us and that Tit. 1.9.10.11 to convince gainesayers whose mouthes must be stopped we should not have troubled thee or our selves with answering such triviall exceptions as doe hereafter follow against what we have proved so plainely from Scripture against the Principles of the Quakers But that we may not seem to leave any stone unturned that may cleare up the truth to the spirits of the people of God we shall proceed to the consideration of that which followes in Naylers answer Principle 1. Not to salute any REader though we have proved that this command Luke 10.4 of not saluting any by the way were but a particular case and not generally binding as we have made evident by many Scripture Arguments and the practises of the Saints and though we have fully proved the command of Christ imposeth generall salutation upon saints as a duty as thou mayst Reade Perfect Pharisee pag. 31. 42. yet thus he excepts Excep 1 The summe of his exception is against High-way salutes To which we answer Reply 1. High-way Salutes are the knowne practice of Quakers as when they meet any of their owne way in the streets or other-where their Phrase is How dost thou and their action to take them by the Hand And if that Text command against High-way salutes how contrary is their practice to it Salute no man by the way 2. However the Quakers doe contend against high-way salutes though by their owne practice Publican-like amongst one another they contradict this Principle yet high-way salutes were the practice of saints when holy Iacob met his Brother Esau by the high-way Gen. 33.3 He passed over before them and bowed himselfe before him seven times untill he came neere to his Brother c. Did nor gracious Abigail salute David by the high-way 1 Sam. 25 23. When David was
under a covenant of workes and how much better a state the Saints are in by interest in Christ then the soule of the first Adem was the Reader way finde at large in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 12. 13. to which he hath answered nothing as his manner is but we shall further adde First Adam was under a covenant of living by doing or by obedience to the Law which is plainely a covenant of works who knowes not this In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye Gen 2.17 2. Adam was under such a Covenant as had no Mediator upon his breach of the command there was none by that Covenant to enterpose betwixt him and death which is a distinguishing consideration betwixt the two Covenants made with the first and second Adam 3. And for Naylers reason He was not under the Covenant of Workes because the Law was given after we may laugh at his ignorance Was the Law never knowne before it was written upon Tables of stone Did God make Adam a rationall creature wholly ignorant of his will Doth the ingraving of the Law in Tables of stone inferre that Adam had not the engraving of that Law upon his heart or that he was not under the command or covenant of that Law but that we have proved from those expresse words of covenant in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye We know not whether to thinke the ignorance of this man or his impudence greater in answering nothing to what we have fully layd downe against his Doctrines Position 9. That no man that commits sin or that is not perfectly holy can ever enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory Excep 1 Nayler thus excepts There is not a word to that purpose as you have set downe Reply This is strange Doth not he confesse there is this Quaere in it Whether any imperfect one shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not then how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and cleane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory yea or no this he confesseth to be his words And is there not a word as he chargeth us there to that purpose 〈◊〉 quâ—râ—es 〈◊〉 to aâ—â—â—â—â— us 2. But the Reader must know that what he there in that Booke layes downe by way of quaery must be looked upon as his positive assertions as thou wilt see by the adjoyning quaeries in the same page where challenging those that are so much offended at perfection he puts these quaeries 1. Whether any imperfect one committing sinne be the Imâ—ge of God yea or no where a man may plainely see he meanes such an one is not the Image of God 2. Whether any can witnesse the worke of Redemption compleat in them by Christ while they commit sinne where it is evident he intends the negative So in this quaere to resolve it into a proposition we appeale to his conscience or the judicious Reader that whilest he puts â—his quaere as a challenge to those that deny perfection in this life Whether any imperfect and uncleave one that lives in sinne shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and clâ—ane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory or no we dare appeale to them we say if it runne not thus by way of assertion That no uncleane or imperfect man can enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory to wash away his sins that dyes imperfect And now thou wilt see how unjustly this man rayles with open mouth as if we were the most wicked lyars in the world when the assertion is so evidently his owne and will so appeare to any that hath but halfe an eye of common understanding Excep 2 He tells us They charge me to say that no man that hath sinned can enter into the Kingdome and as though I owned a Purgatory Reply Nâ—yâ—eâ—s shuffling Hath sinned what a miserable shuffle is this and what a pittifull conscience hath this man thy owne eyes Reader will informe thee that we have not such a tittle in our Booke we charge him to say No man that doth commit sinne and is not perfectly holy can enter into the Kingdome but who chargeth him to have said that no man that hath sinned c. For charging him as if he owned a Purgatory it s like the former surely the man was put to a pinch when he falls a doubling and shuffling so apparently We say this must be his argument Either there must be a Purgatory to wash away the sinne of him that dyes imperfect or else he can never enter into the Kingdome of God It seems Nayler knowes no other way but a Purgatory to wash away his sinne that dyes imperfect But we looke upon that clause as the absurdity which Nayler thinks to run us upon if we will pleade that a man may dye imperfect and yet be saved then we must owne a Purgatory And so because he knew no other way to wash away mens sins Quakers Popery but either by perfect holinesse here or by a Purgatory we found him out a medium even the blood of the Lord Iesus which cleanseth the soule otherwise as to its personall actings very guilty from all sinne Excep 3 Against this he objects that Text 1 Iohn 1.7 Doth it say any are cleansed from sinne while they personally act sinne or the quite contrary Reply Naylers jugling vvith Scripture How falsely doth Nayler deale with the Scripture and imitate the Father of lyes when Satan tempted Christ Mat 4 6 to cast himselfe downe from the Temple he takes that of Scripture that would be thought serve his purpose and leaves out the rest as may be seene by comparing it with Psal 91.11.12 Just so deales Nayler with the Scripture and us leaving out from that Scripture that which immediately followes If we say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us which would fully have made out the mystery of perfect justification consisting with imperfect sanctification it s spoken of Saints that are actually cleansed by the blood of Christ and yet are told there is no truth in them they make God a lyar if they say we have no sinne That Text beyond exception also Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly c. he is silent unto according to his custome Position 10. No reall Saint but he that is perfect and perfectly holy in this life and doth not sinne Our severall proofes that this is their Principle are not denyed but we are reviled for manifesting this to be an errour from Scripture though he hath not answered one of the many Scriptures we gave against this Doctrine Excep 1 The first reviling is this
It soems there can be no greater offence to you then to cry downe sinne and to grow up to perfection c. you pleade for continuance in sinne and imperfection c. you pleade for the Devills Kingdome putting cleansing from sinne and perfection farre off till after death c. Reply Deniall of perfection in this life is no pleading for sin 1. Reader If thou hast read our Booke of the Perfect Pharisee thou wilt see we fore-saw this language from them where we told thee we expect from their former usage in this kinde they will charge us with pleading for sinne pag. 16.17 where we shewd that discovering the imperfections of the best Saints lest they should live upon their owne righteousnesse was no pleading for sin and this we proved from the practice of Christ discovering the imperfection of the Churches of the Spirâ—t rehearsing the faults of the Saints of Paul crying out of the body of his death So that to discover it is not to pleade for it unlesse you will blaspheme the holy One of Israel Had Nayler considered these Texts he might have spared the labour to repeate againe a cavill so fully answered but he answers nothing 2. But yet to make it more cleare that to say perfection in holinesse cannot be attain'd in this life is not to pleade for sinne and for the Devills Kingdome Consider first The Kingdome of the Devill is not pleaded for there where there is a pressing of a continuall wrastling and strugling in the power of Jesus Christ against it which pressing is our constant practice to our people For though it is plaine from Scripture that in the utmost attainements of the people of God still they see but in a glasse darkely 1 Cor. 13. and have not attain'd perfection Psal 3.12 yet it is their duty to struggle and wrastle against the body of their death and to presse towards the marke Phil. 3.14 Againe doth the Physitian meeting with a Patient in a consumption Telling a conceited perfectionist of sin is to deale faithfully vvith his soule who strongly conceives that he is in perâ—â—â— health though the Physitian demonstrate it that there 〈◊〉 such and such decayes in his vitall parts doth he by declaring this pleade for his sickenesse or rather by this means pleade for his use of effectuall means for his recovery For the whole noâ—â— not a Physitian but they that are sicke And Jesus Christ camâ— not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance Nay will not all say rather that the Physitian is more faithfull to the sickâ— man then he is to himselfe and more an enemy to and pleader against the sicknesse then the man is that conceits hâ— is sound and perfect This is the very case betwixt us and Nayler Nayler sayes he is perfect the Quakers say they are perfect and without sinne we pleade and say he is not perfect nay he cannot be perfect while there is such a body of deâ—â—â— in him and such a plague of sinne running in his heart we tell him that he that saith he hath no sinne is a lyâ—r deceivâ—â— himselfe and mâ—kes God a lyar and so doe pleade with him not as he malitiously would scandalize us to lye still in thâ— state content to have the body of his death worke his 〈◊〉 but to goe out to the blood of Jesus Christ for cure that 〈◊〉 quities may be pardoned to fetch strength from the 〈◊〉 of Christ not from his light within him against the bubâ—◠〈◊〉 up of corruptions in the heart and presse towards the 〈◊〉 Whether now pleade for sinne Nayler or we he that wiâ—◠〈◊〉 heare of the Saints being sicke or under any spirituall impâ—â—fection or we that demonstrate their sinne from Scripture that so they may seeke after the healings of the blood 〈◊〉 Jesus The spirit convincing of sin doth not pâ—â—â—â—e for sinne 3. What is the designe of the discovery and convictions 〈◊〉 the sinnes of men by the spirit of the living God Is it 〈◊〉 pleade for sinne that singular office of the spirit Iohn 16 â—â— he shall convince the world of sinne when God doth set oâ— secret sins the secret sinnes of Saints before their eyes is it 〈◊〉 set up the Kingdome of the Devill What blasphemy mâ—â—â— Nayler bring upon himself or is it not evidently to pull doâ—â— the throne of Satan and the power of sinne which never weakened in the soule till it be discovered and never â—â—â—gt more securely and effectually then in the heart of him that secure and confident he is compleat and perfect and sayes Rev. 3.17 I am rich and increased with goods and stand in need of nothing when he knowes not he is miserable poore blinde and naked Pleading for perfection here is a pleading for sin proved in seven particulars 4. We shall adde no more but this that pleading for this that any of the sons of men are perfectly holy and doe not sin which is the designe of Nayler is really to pleade for sinne and to set up and strengthen the barrs of the Kingdome of Satan 1. That soule will never struggle after a better state which lives in a conceit of his perfection here Rom. 8.24 hope that is seene is not hope for what a man seeth why doth he yet hope for how doth this strengthen the Kingdome of darkenesse contrary to Phil 3.12.13.14 Rom. 8 23. 2 Cor. 5.2.3 Phil. 1.21.22 2. This is to cast a needlesnesse upon the pretious blood of Iesus t is a trâ—mpling under foot the blood by which we are justified our propitia ion being through Faith in his blood Rom. 3.25 What needs this fountain for sinne and uncleannesse Zach. 13.1 where there is no sinne What nâ—ed of a Saviour where there is no sinne the whole need no Physi ian Mat. 9.12 and what a wickednesse is this to make the blood of Christ in vain and what is it but as Nayler saith â—o coâ—â—t the blood of the Lord Iesus as a common thing Gal. 3.22 3. Will such a soule ever goe out to pardoning promises and how doth Satan by such a Doctrine as this at once destroy the necessity of the blood and of the promises of Jesus Christ such as these Isay 1.18 though your sinnes be as Scarlet c. Isay 43.25 I am he that blotteth out transgressions Heb. 8.12 Your sinnes and iniquities I will remember no more Is not this evident from the practice of Quâ—kers both in their speaking and writing they never send these soules whom they call damned to the pardoning promises and blood of Christ but to their owne light to save them What need of the promises of pardon when I have no sinne and was it not the Pharisees sin Mat. 15.6 Marke 7.13 to make the command of God of none effect and is it not much more the Quakers sâ—n to make voyd the promises Rom. 3.3 Rom. 4.14 So Heb. â— 2.3 If the Word spoken by Angels â—as steadfast c. how
Christs being made manifest which are not voyd because they are not fulfilled in this world such as the putting of the Saints into the possession of his fulnesse of glory the putting of all his enemies under his feet c. so that perfection in holinesse being one of these things that are reserved for a state of glory we doe not destroy the end of Christs comming when we pleade he shall attaine this end in his owne appointed time and though the most holy here are full of many infirmities yet the day shall be when the workes of Satan shall be destroyed in them altogether in the time appointed by the Father the Quakers may as well say because the Saints are not now in glory therefore Christ hath lost his end in dying What we have said to this both in Christs satisfying for soules whereby he presents them perfect as to justification as also his destroying at death the whole body of sinne when they enter into a perfect state of glory will shew the vanity of his second plea for though we be not perfectly holy in our selves in this life yet we are perfect as to justification and compleat in him Col. 2.10 and though the Saints be not compleatly holy at present yet the day is comming when they shall even the time appointed by him that dyed for it and purposeth to present us spotlesse at his comming so that Christ loseth not the end of his comming Mat. 5.28 opened As to his third that Mat. 5.18 not one jâ—t or tittle of the Law shall passe till all be fulfilled which he brings to prove perfection in the Saints thus First It is evident that he that is there spoken of in v. 17. as fulfilling the Law is the Lord Iesus I came to fulfill it and that was solely and alone the worke of Christ both as he was the accomplishment of Prophesies in the Law or Booke of Scripture as he was the substance of all shaddowes in the Law ceremoniall and as he in Person did exactly as Mediator performe all the duties of the Law Morall that so by his obedience many might be made righteous What is this to prove perfection in the Saints because Christ fulfilled all righteousnesse 2. But the naturall and proper sense of this Text is clearely another businesse Christ is speaking here that the Law or the word of command and prophesies shall stand good and sure the word here is interpreted in the repetition of them Luke 16.17 not one jot shall fall so here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not one tittle shall passe from the Law it shall stand good and entire in it selfe Christ is not speaking as if the Law should be compleatly fulfilled and obeyed by us it shall stand in its force and authority notwithstanding that I am come yet I came not to destroy it but to continue it in its truth entirenesse and authority like that Rom. 3.31 Doe we then make voyd the Law through Faith nay we establish it And that Isay 40.48 repeated 1 Peter 1.25 the grasse withereth and the flower thereof fadeth but the Word of the Lord abideth for ever And what a non sensicall reason is this to prove that the Saints are perfect here and doe perfectly fulfill the Law because the Law shall not lose a tittle of its authority and entirenesse Rom. 8.4 opened 3. His third plea to prove the perfection of holinesse in this life is Rom. 8.4 that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us To which we answer First The Apostle here ver 1. is speaking of justification there is now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus Ver. 3. he layes downe whence that freedome from condemnation flowes and tells you that what the Law could not doe in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his owne Sonne in the likenesse of sinfull flesh for sin viz. by a sacrifice for sinne or to satisfie for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh that is when man could not be justified by reason that sinfull flesh could not satisfie the Law God sent his Sonne to satisfie for sinne that so the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us So that though we personally cannot and could not performe it yet through our union with Christ being dead with Christ Col. 2.20 quickned with him Ephes 2.5 we have his righteousnesse fulfilled in us Thou wilt fullier understand that this place is meant of the righteousnesse of Christ satisfying and fulfilling the righteousnesse of the Law and so made ours by our union with him if thou consider these observations 1. It is no where said in all the Booke of God that the righteousnesse of the Law is fulfilled in this life in any Saint as to inherent holinesse nay the contrary is here asserted ver 3. the Law was weake through Faith As also Rom. 3.20 that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law c. 2. It is Beza's note that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in us not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of us or by us 3. Is not this to goe about to confirme justification by inherent holinesse against which you have had such undenyable proofe 4. What is this but to build up the old Popish notion of justification by inherent holinesse 5. If any shall thinke that latter expression who walkes not after the flesh but after the spirit shall tye this fulfilling of the Law in us to sanctification we referre him to the first verse where the same words are used and yet they are onely layd downe as a description of the Persons to whom there is no condemnation as they are layd downe also as a description of these persons that enjoy the fruite of that glorious worke of Christ fulfilling the Law and satisfying it So that this Text onely holds forth the satisfaction of the Law by Iesus Christ to be made really ours by our union with him as fully as if it had been performed in our owne persons But as to justification by inherent holinesse or perfection of it in this life we have fully proved the contrary Lastly He tells us we looked upon it as a strange thing that Farnesworth should say No uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of Heaven When as that which we say is no such thing but a challenging of Farnsworth his ignorance of the Gospel that he can see no consistency with these two A Saint cannot be perfect here And no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of God Is this to count the Scripture a strange thing or is it not Farnsworths grosse ignorance that he knows no way of entring into glory unlesse he be perfect before he dye Is he not grossely ignorant of the maine mistery of justification by the blood of Christ May not a man be in part uncleane by reason of the imperfection of his present holines and yet pure and spotlesse too as to
justification by reason of the imputation of the obedience of him who is the Lord our righteousnesse This Reader is their great Idoll and Diana and therefore thou wilt pardon our tediousnesse and clearely see how blinde these men are as to Gospel righteousnesse Position 11. That every man in the world hath a light within him sufficient to guide him to salvation without the help of any outward light or discovery In his answer to this Position he denyes none of our proofs but addes his further profession of the same Principle in these words All the World shall witnesse against you that they have a light that lets them see when they sinne which if they did minde and obey would leade out of sinne unto Christ c. Except The maine part of his answer is by way of rayling all that he speaks to make good this Position is that Christ is the true light and that he enlightneth every man and that where he is there need no outward discovery Reply For the first that Christ is the true light is confessed on all hands but that Iesus Christ is in every man or gives a saving light to every man we utterly deny and we have plentifully proved in our answer to the fourth Position The first Text he proves it by is Iohn 1.9 He is the true light that lightneth every one We have fully opened this Text in our answer to the fourth Position and convincingly shewed it is not meant at all of any Gospel saving light where we desire the Reader to satisfie himselfe at large Io. 8.12 opened For his second Iohn 8.12 I am the light of the World he that followes me shall not walke in darkenesse This proves not that Christ doth give a saving light to the whole world no more then that Text 1 Iohn 2.2 doth prove that the whole world shall have the benefit of Christs propitiation Secondly the words immediately following might satisfie Nayler that he is thus a saving light onely to them that follow him who are Beleevers drawne by the power of the spirit of God Cant. 1.4 No man comes to me except the Father draw me Iohn 6.44.45 Every man that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to me So that Christ is onely the light of those that have learned of the Father and have been drawne by the Father and follow him Here is a cleare restriction of Christs being a light onely to Beleevers to them that follow him c. Io. 1.4.5 opened The third Scripture Iohn 1.4 5. the light shined in darkenesse and the darkenesse comprehended it not is cleare against him For the Phrase of the light shined in darkenesse imports onely that Jesus Christ was Preached to them Christ came amongst them and Iohn Preached him to them Ver. 29. Behold the Lambe of God c. yet they were in darkenesse for want of light they could not so much as discover him nor receive him so farre were they from knowing Christ or the world from having Christ a light in them all that they could not apprehend him when he was Preached openly to them His fourth Text is Iohn 3.19 this is the condemnation that light is come into the world is as full against Nayler as the former for it speaks this that Jesus Christ is the true light was Preached to the World and discovered to them when he had before been a mistery hid from Ages and Generations Col. 1 28. yet they would not beleeve him but loved to continue in that darkenesse or ignorance of Christ which is in all by nature Now for the third branch of his answer that where this light of Christ is there need no outward discovery We answer 1. We have abundantly proved that Jesus Christ is not in all in out answer to his reply to the fourth Position 2. We have also proved That Iesus Christ neither is in all nor doth he enlighten all by giving every man a knowledge of the Gospel this we have done at large in the same place 3. We have fully proved that all men in the world doe need an outward light or discovery and that it is the way of Christ his making knowne himselfe by outward discovery and Preaching the Gospel in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 18.19 in six arguments to which Nayler answer nothing Necessity of outward reaching further proved All that he brings for it de novo in his answer is onely his bare word without either argument or text so that we need to say no more Yet ex abundanti we shal adde First It was the wisedome of the Father to have the Gospel Preached to every creature and therefore did he send men forth to publish it Marke 16.15 Mat. 28.19.30 2. It pleased the Father to owne Preaching of the Gospel with the conversion of soules Acts 2.41 1 Cor. 1.21 I◠pleased God by the foolishnesse of Preaching to save them that beleeve 3. It pleased the Lord Iesus when he was ascended up to Heaven to give officers for the perfecting of the Saints Ephes 4.11.12 for the edifying of the body of Christ 4. It pleased him also to establish this as an everlasting Ordinance to continue till the end of all things Mat. 28 last Ephes 4 15. He that hath any sense of the wisedome of God and submission to it will not dare to say with Nayler that every man hath a light within him sufficient without the help of any outward discovery or to charge folly in doing all this upon him whose wisedome is admired infinite and acteth nothing needlessely and in vaine But what dare not these men doe who dare lift up themselves in their blasphemous pride to be as pure as God 2 Pet. 1.19 opence vindicated There is one Scripture 2 Peter 1.19 which is not brought by Nayler by way of proofe but is most ignorantly wrested by him to this their Idoll of light within We hinted how little the man had of any knowledge of Scripture by his so blinde and pittifull abusing this Text in that former Booke Perfect Pharisee p. 19. We see he is yet as confident as he was we shall onely say that which is there called the sure Word of Prophesie 2 Peter 1.19 is that word of Prophesie which in old time holy men of God spake c v. 21. and to this he bids them take heed viz. to the Doctrine of the Prophets where Peter doth not send them to the light within them but to the Bookes and Words of the Prophets as Christ sends the Iewes to the same Scriptures Iohn 3.39 Nay the Text is so farre from hinting any light within that the Apostle tells you these words of the Prophets were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more sure Word then the voyce that came from Heaven ver 17. Thus the man hath still the weakenesse to produce Scripture that fully destroyes his owne Principle We shall adde no more but from these words of Naylers Where this light of Christ is
Scriptures not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them This he denyeth not we proved it by five testimonies He answers by one Scripture grossely perverted and two others ignorantly applyed but gives no answer to many Scripture arguments against it 14 Spirits not to be tryed by Scripture This we proved by three testimonies none of which nor the Position is denyed but goes about to prove it and falls a rayling 15. No sence meaning or exposition to be given or studying of Scripture This we proved in foure testimonies he confesseth goes about to prove it but answers not a word to fourteen evident Scriptures but falls a rayling grossely 16. They cry downe Baptisme and the Lords Supper as types and shadowes For this we gave foure proofes which he denyed not and we further prove it He shuffles from Baptisme in generall to the businesse of Infant Baptisme and falls a rayling 17. No mediate cull to the Ministry Denies not the Proof but falls miserably a rayling as if he would powr out his gall upon us As for the rest of his Reply to what we charged upon them as their Principles and Practises there is such palpable shufflings such miserable weakenesse and such horrible rayling as that we should not have medled with it at all but that we beleeve it is the designe of God to lay more and more open the spirits of these men THis Booke pretending to Answer us is thus subscribed By one whom the World calls Iames Nayler About man being called by names given them by their Parents We are â—ot a little jealous that there lyes a mystery of iniquity in that very stile and expression For first God himselfe whom to thinke to follow any sinfull expression or custome were no lesse then blasphemous calls men by their Names of distinction given by Men. Gen. 22.11 God said unto him Abraham Hannah called her sonne Samuel 1 Sam. 1.20 She called his name Samuel c. and afterwards when the Lord appeared to him to call him out to the worke of the Priest-hood chap. 3.4 and 6. and 8. verses The Lord called Samuel and called him againe so the second and third time here its evident that God himselfe calls him by the Name that his Mother gave him Acts 9.4 there Iesus Christ from Heaven calls him Saul Saul a Name given him before his conversion Christ when upon Earth calls his Disciples by the Names given them at their Circumcision as Philip Iohn Simon sonne of Ionas c. The Apostles doe so constantly as Festus Agrippa Gaius Aristarchus c. and this without such a mysterious preamble as one whâ—â— the World calls Festus Agrippa c. You see how these pretendâ—r to Scripture depart from Scripture as if they would include God and Christ under the carnall observations of the World or else teach them to speake 2. It is apparant That these very men doe constantly call themselves by these Names as Iames Nayler doth in an Epistle at the end of Farneworths Booke George Fox in a Pamphlet lately Printed and the very men of their Generation call them so without any such preamble The mystery of â—â—e 〈…〉 â—riting tâ—emselve such wâ—o the World câ—ll so and so 3. But shall we tell you where the mystery lyes We are satisfied that this expression is meerly to cloake their pretence to an equality with God Our reason is evident For in this very Answer of Naylers pag 4. where he relates Foâ—es his evadâ—ng of the charge against him that he said He was equall with God Nayler thus hints that Fox being asked whether he spake this of George Fox as he was a creature To this he answered I deny George Fox he is dust and must be dust but I and my Father are one Is not this as plaine as the Sunne that he therefore denyes George Fox that he may deny his being a creature one that must returne to dust that so he may set up and assert his onenesse with God Compare but this with that usuall expression of theirs in their Books Whose name in the flesh is James Nayler Whose name in the flesh is Iohn Audland c. and it will be more apparent But more of this you have in our Answer to their Reply to the first Article In the Epistle in the said Answer Written by A. P. he calls us About the word Priest the Priests of the North a word on purpose given us to our reproach Surely their pretended meeknesse should have taught them other expressions though truely we finde and the Reader may even in this their answer finde more cursed rayling then we receive from the worst of men yet our suffering in that kinde from them also is not small But A. P. might know that every Priest was to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sinne and that we waite not upon any such worke and that the Gospel knowes no Chiefe Priest but the Lord Iesus who is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek not any Priests at all properly but the Saints metaphorically â—â—lled a Royall Priest-hood and shall the stile of the Lord Iesâ—â— and his Saints be a reproach in the mouthes of Quakers He goes on and tells the world That we 〈◊〉 all strangers to that sort of people called Quakers except one A. P. who is none of the least of that sort of people cannot but know that he is too well knowne to all of us Secondly Three of these five also have had cause to know many more of them as M. Taylour Iohn Audland Stubbs Holmes Atkinson Hedgshon Ayry c. and others from whom we suffered disturbance in our publique Ministry and some of these also are pretenders to be eminently sent forth Thirdly Though all of us were strangers to their persons yet are we not strangers to them in their writings and so if it be possible to know them by their Papers which they industriously scatter up and downe we know them fully But whither tends this aspersion that they are strangers to all of us save one but to make the world beleeve that we have taken up these things against them by report But we hope the Reader by this time understands the nakednesse of the slander and the subtilty of A. P. W. C. As for that evidence which one of us gives concerning their principles and practises which A. P. under the name of Reports would insinuate into the people as if they were lyes the Reader shall observe that the most of these evidences are not at all contradicted by Nayler in his Answer but passed over which we take as confessed by him others onely evaded which yet shall appeare to the Reader in the ensuing answer to be either such things as he was an eye or eare witnesse of or shall be fully confirmed by undeniable testimony A. P. goes on and tells the Reader that in this answer What is truth is owned and what is false is
Bâ—oke be the persecution Pauls zeale against wicked principles and unlawfull practises may as well be called persecution as our pleading for the truth of Christ against opposers we being set for the confirmation and defence of the Gospel We now proceed to take notice of his answers to the Positions they have asserted the first is Position 1. Their Equality with God Excep 1 TO the first Proofe that George Fox affirmed He was equall with God Iames Nayler answers and sayes that it is false that George Fox did say that George Fox was equall with God Reply Let the Reader take notice that Nayler in his reply doth not deny our proofe at all when we say that George Fox said these words I am equall with God he doth not except against this at all 2. Naylers further reply plainely doth evidence it also where he confesseth that George Fox when he was asked Whether he was equall with God said I deny George Fox he is dust c. but I and my Father are one VVhere he clearely asserts his onenesse with God as to equality for that was the question the Justices put to him So that our proofe against him stands cleare by his owne confession Now the strength of Naylers answer lyes in this evasion which we doubt not but any that have their eyes open will discover to be the subtilty of the Serpent viz. he doth not deny that George Fox said He was equall with God but denyes that he said that George Fox was equall with God where Nayler makes Fox to distinguish ignorantly and make a difference betwixt George Fox and himselfe so that though George Fox is not equall with God yet he that is called George Fox is equall with God Now to this blasphemous evasion we thus answer 1. If George Fox for his blasphemy be turned into Hell what will become of him that is what will become of that person that is called by the name of George Fox 2. Is not the name alwayes given for the distinguishing of the person yea even when they are in a blessed state translated from corruption Mat. 17.3 there appeâ—red Moses and Elias talking with him they were Moses and Elias still though in a state of glory So that the person is understood and distinguished by the name and therefore by the name George Fox must be understood in our Booke the person distinguished by that name we were never so childish as to thinke that a bare name without its relation to the person distinguished by â—it any should cry up to an equality with God we speake of the person understood by George Fox Such cobweb answers and childish evasions may satisfie such deluded spirits as Nayler but we cannot but in the feare of the Lord cry out Oh! the plotted blasphemy of these men 3. Did ever any of the Saints of God in the old or new Testament distinguish in this way Did not Paul say Paul a servant of Iesus Christ not saying I deny Paul Paul is dust and must to dust but I am a servant of Jesus Christ what unscripturall and ridiculous language is this 4. Hence you may see it was not without reason that we were jealous of a mystery of iniquity lying under these distinctions betwixt George Fox and himselfe and in these words one whom the World calls James Nayler and in Francis Howgill his paper called A woe to Kendall one whom the World calls F. H. 5. The very evasion that Nayler useth is a very great demonstration to us that George Fox asserted he was equall with God For Nayler confesseth he was present when George Fox was asked whether he spoke this of George Fox as he was a creature Now here is a cleare confession that George Fox did say He was equall with God that 's confessed he spoke this onely the question was about the sence of these words and whether he spoke them of himselfe as a creature What ever the person were that asked Fox that question we would leave this upon his conscience what apprehensions he had of Fox For by the necessary and infallible rules of reason there is nothing that hath a being but either a creature or a Creator and if Fox have an other consideration as that question clearely implyes besides that as a creature it must necessarily be as a Creator and so his equality with God is asserted Well t is confessed he spoke these words 2. In this answer he denies George Fox as a creature the meaning therof as given in answer to that question must be this that George Fox as a creature denyes to be equall with God but that he as under some other consideration is equall with God he denyes not nay asserts it when he sayes I and my Father are one 6. We cannot but presse it upon the Reader that in theâ—e debates about equality with God it had been easie for Naylâ—r or Fox to have declared their totall inequality with God and not so to have deluded the people in such fond distinctions as I am equall with God and yet George Fox is not equall with God nay this debate certainly was an eminent call to thâ—m to disclaime it if this wretched principle had not filled their hearts yet in stead of our ingenious denying of this blasphemy their whole worke is falsely to assert it under the cloake of subtle and unscripturall nay blasphemous distinctions and evasions Iohn 10.13 opened Now for the Scriptures he so blasphemously abuseth they are these two First Iohn 10.30 I and my Father are one this Scripture that it is properly and incommunicably spoken of Christ God and Man and cannot be applyed to any meere creature we shall thus make evident The Person there spoken of is first in the 9. ver the Doore I am the Doore by me if any enter in he shall be saved Is George Fox the doore 2. That Person spoken of affirmes ver 18. that he hath power to lay downe his life of himselfe and power to take it up againe Hath George Fox that power 3. In ver 26. He saith to the Jewes Ye cannot beleeve because ye are not of my Sheep Dare George Fox say so The reason why men doe not beleeve is it because George Fox hath not elected them from Eternity 4. That Person there spoken of faith ver 27.28 My Sheep heare my voyce and I give unto them eternall life neither shall any man plucke them out of my hands Is it not blasphemy for Fox to assert these things of him else 5. He also saith My Father that gave them me is greater then all ver 29. Did the Father give the Elect to George Fox Now ver 30. this Person of whom these things are spoken it is who is one with the Father And you may as well ascribe the other five considerations to George Fox or any meere creature as this that he and the Father are one But oh the greatnesse of his ignorance of God of Christ of Scripture of himselfe
which is the cause of such most wretched blasphemies 1 Cor 6.17 opened This next Scripture is 1 Cor 6.17 He that is joyned unto the Lord is one spirit The designe of the Apostle there being to dehort from Fornication upon the account of that union that is betwixt the Fornicator and the Harlot ver 16 they are one body for two saith he shall be one flesh doth adde a further reason to the Saints he that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit V. 15. Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them the members of an Harlot God forbid Now that this Text doth not hold forth a Beleevers equality with God will thus appeare For first The strength of the Apostles argument in this place is by the membership of a Beleever to Christ to prove the exceeding sinfulnesse of taking a member of Christ and making it a member of an Harlot all the union it holds forth betwixt us and Christ is onely as we are members of the Lord Jesus Now the membership of a Beleever with Christ is nothing to prove his equality with God For first The implantation of a Beleever into Christ being by Faith in his death and Faith it selfe being a finite grace can no way bring the soule into an infâ—nite equality 2. Besides Paul after membership by Faith in Christ yet complained of a body of sinne which utterly disclaimes all equality with God 2. The nature of this union speaks no physicall onenesse for as there is no physicall onenesse betwixt the Fornicator and the Harlot neither are they physically one body though so ca led out of a relative respect so neither is there any such physicall onenesse betwixt Beleevers and Christ And without the soules physicall onenessâ— with God there can be no equality betwixt it and God nay if Christ were not essentially one with the Father neither could he be equall with the Father Having thus seen the full meaning of these Scriptures we beleeve Readâ—râ— thou wilt wonder how the Justices could heare the Scriptures so blaâ—phemously abused and yet be satisfied as Nayler pretends they understanding his affirming his equality with God of the spirit of Christ in him For did they thinke that the spirit did essentially dwell in Fox how then came they to be satisfied when Fox attributes that to himselfe which is the spirits property or how comes he to be the same essentially with the spirit of God or did they conceive the spirit in Fox to be the graces or fruits of the spirit how then could they be satisfied it so in as much as those fruits of the spirit are in their best capacity but a new creature and so in no way equall with God But were they all satisfied How then was it that Mr. Sawry a Member of the late Parliament and as unprepossessed as any of the Justices then present was so fully satisfied that Fox was really and by confession guilty of those blasphemous words that he said he was equall with God that he openly declared against him in the presence of them all and urged the Iustices that Fox was clearely guilty of that blasphemy by his owne confession before them all Now for what he addes concerning Dr. Marshall his Oath That one of the Iustices who was present at Lancaster when Fox spoke these words did openly there witnesse against Marshals false Oath in the hearing of the open Court Let the Reader know W. C. 1. T is true that Iustice did so in the hearing of one of us but did it in such a way with his head hanging downe and a low voyce that spake clearely enough to observant hearers he had more will to accuse him then either confidence or reason 2. That Iustice was Coll. Benson t is true he was at Lancaster and t is as true he was a Quaker long since and before that time and had made it his worke to ride up and downe about that businesse to get Fox discharged from his blasphemy and what such a partiall evidence is to gaine-say the Doctors Oath let the Reader judge 3. Besides the Dr. swore it and so did Mr. Altham but Coll. Benson onely whispered it or said it at the utmost 4. It was fully evidenced after in Lancaster before the whole Country 5. But to discharge our selves and to cleare up the truth beyond all denyall we have here given you the testimony of the said Dr. Marshall and Mr. Altham sent to us and dated at Lancaster Ian. 19. 1653. George Fox said That he that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are one and they are equall George Fox being asked Whether he was equall with God answered thus I am equall with God The truth of these two Articles against George Fox we have already witnessed by deposing our Oaths before the Magistrate at severall times and still witnesse though now our testimony be not so necessary as formerly since the observant Reader may discerne what we witnesse more generally held out in their owne Books perticularly in the Booke entituled Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 8. line 8. See also their answers pag. 5. 6. and 10. Jan. 19. 1653. William Marshall Michaell Altham Excep 2 Thus we have you see fully cleared our first testimony And for the second That Nayler said He was as holy just and good as God against which Nayler thus excepts It is an untruth and was never spoken by me nâ—r ever did it enter into my thoughts but is a lye raysed up by the father of lyes the Devill and vented by his servants to make the truth odious and so goes on denying that ever Will. Baldwinson heard him say so c. We thus answer Reply 1 Surely this man thinkes by his rage to darken the truth of this testimony but that thou mayst againe acquit us and see that Iames Nayler makes no conscience of lyes as we have given thee the testimonies of Dr. Marshall and Mr. Altham for the former so we here give thee a large account of the proofe of this horrible blasphemy under the hand of Will. Baldwinson January 14. 1653. Sir YOu Writ to me to certifie you of some Words that I heard from Iames Nayler and Richard Farnsworth as they call themselves amongst us I my selfe went to George Bateman his house in Underbarrow called the Crag and there was a great deale of people come in to the house and Nayler and Farnsworth sitting beyond a Table upon a Bench and there Nayler speaking and teaching Perfection and to be attaind to in this life and to be without sin this teaching so did trouble me as being contrary to the Word of God that I stood up before the Table and spoke these words Friends doe you hold that a man may attaine to that height of perfection in this life to be as perfect as pure as holy and just as God himselfe And they joyntly replyed Yea and they were so And one in the house spake and said My question was not
to the purpose And I answered and said But it was because I knew no such thing by my selfe And after these words they began to teach that every man had a light within him if hearkened to would teach guide and save him And I replyed againe and said how is it that our Saviour Christ sayes There is no man comes to me except my father which sent me draw him before God and Christ draw where is my light and to this they spoke not one word so I went home from amongst them But the day of the Moneth nor the Moneth I set not downe I not fearing the danger of this Heresie All these words were spoken in the same house in the night time Will. Baldwinson We doe testifie this to be Will. Baldwinsons owne testimony Tho Walker John Myriell John Wallace 2. Here thou hast our innocency vindicated and now what reason hath Nayler to call us the servants of the Devill and venters of lyes when as thou seest his deniall of that testimony is but the backing of his owne blasphemy with a notorious lye which must needs fly in in his face if he have any sparke of conscience left in him 3. This full testimony gives a further discovery of their Positions we formerly layd downe as first Their asserting perfection in this life and to be without sinne As also secondly Not onely Nayler but Farnsworth also affirmed he was as holy just and good as God for so saith Will. Baldwinson they joyntly replyed Yea and they were so Thirdly That every man hath a light within him if harkned to will teach guide and save him Thus we can blesse the Lord that our being forced by Nayler his charging us with lyes to vindicate the truth hath been an occasion to discover the blasphemies of these men more apparantly and convincingly unto all But we wonder how they dare deny these things or why Nayler should stand disputing against these testimonies when their being equall with God is fully layd downe in Foxes owne words in Print See Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 8. and line 8. He that hath the same spirit that raysed up Iesus Christ is equall with God And againe thus line 11. c As Iesus Christ which is the mystery hath passed before so the same spirit takes upon it the same seed and is the same where it is made manifest Where it is clearely his designe to shew that there is the same hypostaticall union betwixt the spirit and our nature where the spirit dwels as was betwixt the Divine nature and the Humane in the Lord Jesus Excep 3 To our proofe that George Fox affirmed He was the Judge of the World Nayler denieth it not but replyes by justifying that expression And tells us we are grossely ignorant of Christ and rayles at us exceedingly For this he quotes 1. Cor. 6.2.3 Know you not that the Saints shall judge the World Hence he abuseth the Scripture to inferre that George Fox is the Judge of the World Reply 1 Cor. 6.2 opened For the opening of this Scripture know first That the Father hath committed all judgement to the Sonne Iohn 5 22. Acts 17.31 God hath appointed a day in which he will judge the World in righteousnesse by that Man whom he hath ordained whereof he hath given an assurance unto all men in that he hath raysed him from the dead Where you see plainely the Father hath eminently apointed Jesus Christ alone that man to be the Iudge of the World How then comes George Fox to be Iudge of the World for the Scripture doth but hold forth One to be the Iudge of the World even the Lord Iesus whom the Father hath therefore furnished with all necessary qualifications viz. of infinite power infinite knowledge infinite presence things absolutely necessary for the Iudge of the World 1 Cor. 15. â—5 Againe It is one thing to Iudge the world and much another thing to be the Iudge of it there is very much difference betwixt these two but George Fox must be either the judge oâ— none it seems 3. It is not said the Saints doe judge the world that 's proper to the Lord Iesus but t is said they shall judge the world they shall judge Angels the Apostles kept very strictly and closely to the expression of the future clearely holding forth that he means of their judging of the world at the end thereof and the resurrection of the dead according to that of Christ concerning the Apostles in the day of judgement Mat. 19.28 Verily I say unto you that you which have followed me in the regeneration when the Sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his glory ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel We shall not need to speake of the manner of their judging as Iustices at the Bench by subscription or assent to the righteous proceedings of the Lord Iesus at that day And is it not still apparant to be a blasphemy for Fox to say he is the judge of the world And can the abusing of this Scriture help him And what reason hath Nayler to charge us with grosse ignorance and rayle upon us upon this account but we have layd this open enough to any Reader Onely this we shall adde in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 6. it is objected against Fox that he professed himselfe to be the Eternall judge of the world not onely the judge but the Eternall judge and this he doth not at all deny but blasphemously goeth about to justifie it This is suitable to that which one of these Quakers lately wrote to an eminent Officer in the Army who told it himselfe to one of us viz. Looke to the light within thee which cannot sinne whereby thou wilâ— judge and determine God-like His next justification of that title is bottom'd upon that 1 Cor. 2.15 1 Cor. 2.15 opened The spirituall man judgeth all things To which we answer that he that is acquainted with the Originall will easily perceive that the word judgeth in the 15. ver is the same with that in the 14. ver which is rendred discerned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the meaning of the expression is no more but the spirituall man discerneth all things All things viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirituall mysteries of the Gospel this is evident that these all things are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Apostle is speaking of the Mysteries of the Gospel ver 7. the wisedome of God in a mystery he is speaking of such things ver 9. which God hath prepared for theâ— that love him and ver 11. the things of God ver 12. the things freely given to us of God ver 13. things spoken of such things as are ver 16. the minde of Christ So that Nayler is wide to seek when he applyes this as he doth the spirituall man t is true doth discerne the mysteries of the Gospel and minde of
Reader If thou wondreâ— at the length of our answer to this particular truely the dread of the great God hath been here in upon our soules and we thinke no time or paines too much to vindicate the honour of our dread Lord and his Sonne Jesus Christ remembring that his glory he will not give to any other Position 2. That there is no distinction of Persons in the God-head Except Against our proofe for this Nayler objects That such a Position is not in Sauls Errand to Damascus and sayes we have not any proofe for what we here accuse of Reply 1 That George Fox in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. being asked Whether there be one individuall God destinguished into Father Sonne and holy Ghost Answered It was but a busie minde so to aske c. so little respect he hath to that saving mystery of the Trinity this that Booke will witnesse And that we had reason to inferre this Position to be a principle of their way will thus appeare 1. If Nayler had taken notice of our Booke he might have considered these words immediately following With other assertions of the same kinde knowne to some of us Now had he considered this he might have seen that we did not gather that this denying of the Persons c. was their Principle onely from what Fox layes downe in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. but from that of Fox together with other assertions of the same kinde knowne to some of us We know it to be ther Principle by comparing that expression of Fox with what our selves did know from others of them those truths compared were our proofe of that assertion as the Reader will presently fully see 2. Had we had no other ground but that expression of Foxes when he sayes It s a busie minde to enquire c. this had been enough For certainely if Fox thinke it to be a busie minde to enquire it its cleare he doth not beleeve it himselfe as he would not have it to be a matter of any others Faith 3. But thirdly Doth he say we have not any proofe for what we here accuse of Let both him and all men know that we have not charged that assertion on them without sufficient evidence Tomlinson an eminent man in that way in his Book called A Word of Reproofe to the Priests pag. 4. line 20. boldly affirmes the spirit to be no other but Christ himselfe in flesh Is not this to deny the Trinity and take away the distinction of Persons in the God-head 2. One of us doth know this was the Principle of Mr. Taylour Coll. Benson c. and so it was not asserted without reason and their owne spirits and consciences will beare me witnesse W.C. 3. A godly Minister in Westmoreland wrote to us that one of his charge being perverted to become a Quaker affirmed that there was one God bâ—t no such thing as a distinction of Persons in the God-head and spoke many words passionately against it And now whether there is not just cause to charge them with maintaining this blasphemy will be fully manifest and how unâ—ighteously Nayler hath so reviled us upon this account But we leave him to the Lord to rebuke Position 3. That the soule is a part of the Divine Essence Excep To that we layd downe as to the proofe and confutation of this Nayler onely replyes What the soule is you know not who live in the fall and are vaine contenders and pleaders for sinne and so goes on grossely rayling Reply For the proofe the e set downe let the Reader observe that he doth not in the least deny it though it be a blasphemous Principle W. C. And one of us doth still affirme that he was an eare witnesse of it Secondly Here we might very well expect that sith he could not deny our proofe he shâ—uld answer to our confutation of that blasphemy Against which we have given six reasons but instead thereof he falls a rayling as if a Rabshakehs spirit were divine Rhetoricke And what sayes he He sayes We know not what a soule is and that we pleade for sinne c. and seeke gaine from our quarâ—ers c. This is hâ—s answer to our arguments We shall not trouble the Read â— with answering their scandals and revilingâ— bâ—t sâ—â— the eâ—ample of Christ before our eyes 1 Pet 2.23 who whâ—n he was reviled reviled not againe Position 4. That Christ is in every man and in the reprobates he is held under corruption Excep 1 To this Nayler answers thus When will you cease to adde your lyes to slander withall Reply We admire how the man can have so much impudence to charge lyes upon us When as first within six lines Nayler himselfe confesseth that he said That if an Indian were there he should witnesse against him viz. W. C. for affirming that Christ did not dwell in the Indians that never heard the Gospel For the said W. C. did he not thinke the conscience of Iames Nayler feared durst appeale to himselfe whether that discourse was not about every mans having a light within them and that light to be Christ so that he cannot but remember that he affirmed Christ to be a light within the very Indians Secondly Nay further lines 16. 17. Nayler most ignorantly reasons that Christ is in the most vile in the World else he cannot judge them Certainely had the man any sparke of conscience or ingenuity left he durst not in the same page and with the same breath deny and affirme the same Doctrine Excep 2 But oh thou full of all subtilty Did I say that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption let all that were there be witnesse against thee Reply 1. In our proofe there is no such thing layd to Naylers charge For that Position of theirs as we layd it consisteth of two parts and Nayler might clearely have seen that he is brought onely as a proofe to the first part of it viz. That Christ is in every man for all he is charged with is that he extended the in-dwellings of Christ to Indians and therefore it shares but of the fulnesse of his gall thus to poure it out without cause The proofe of the second part viz. that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption we layd downe in our second proofe in a Letter of Iohn Audlands to Edward Briggs which Letter Nayler doth not deny For having told him he was damned yet he also tells him that he crucifieth Christ within him c. What is this but to affirme Christ under corruption But to make this further cleare this Nayler himselfe in Edward Briggs his house used this expression Father rayse up thy owne Sonne from under bondage as we have it from his testimony under his hand in a certificate dated Ian 14. 1653. And to put it yet out of all possibility of denyall that the jugling of these men may further yet appeare in denying their owne Principles We
give you a part of a dispute betwixt M. Sanderson a Minister of the Gospel and severall Quakers at Peirce-bridge Decemb. 12. 1653. attested by the subscriptions of ten severall persons part of which concerning the thing in question we have given you word for word Quaker Is not Christ the true light in every man speake Mr. Sand. Where Christ is he rules as a King but in all he doth not so exercise his Government Therefore c. Quaker In some he is kept under corruption and this I witnesse he is subdued in me this I pawne my salvation upon Mr. Sand. Its Blasphemy to say that a finite corruption should keep under an infinite Christ this is to make corruption stronger then Christ Quaker Well if a man obey the light within him he will be happy c. How undenyably doth this convince this man of his faithlesse and perfidious dealings in seeking most unworthily to shuffle off a Principle so fully owned by them Heb. 6.4.6 opened vindicated viz. that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption yea notwithstanding his so confident denyall of this principle yet Nayler immediately forgets himselfe and falls to proving of it in justification of Audlands Letter from Heb. 6.4 6. that its impossible to renew them againe to repentance sith they crucifie to themselves the Sonne of God afresh and put him to an open shame whence he would prove that Christ Jesus is in the reprobates because they crucifie afresh the Sonne of God 1. Let the Reader obâ—erve it is not said they crucifie the Sonne of God in themselves but to themselves How then doth this Text speake any thing to the upholding of his errour 2. Those the Apostle writes to were Hebrews the Iewes such as were of that people that crucified and put to death the Lord of life Now as it doth not follow that because they crucified him upon the Crosse therefore he was in them so neither doth it follow that Iesus Christ is in reprobates and apostates because they crucifie him afresh unto themselves This is enough to shew that though Apostates doe crucifie the Sonne of God to themselves yet it no way followes that Jesus Christ is in every man and in the reprobates is under bondage And for as much as it is affirmed that those Apostates there spoken of are included under an impossibility of salvation it must necessarily follow that if Nayler will suppose that Christ doth dwell in those then he must affirme that Christ doth dwell in those whose sins are unpardonable that have fin'd a sin against the holy Ghost Excep 3 There are yet these things objected to justifie this Principle Iohn 1.9 this is that true light that lightneth every man that cometh into the world Iohn 1.9 opened For the opening of this Scripture you are to know that Iohn is speaking here of the Eternall Word In the beginning was the Word all things were made by him c. so that his designe is to manifest the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the Creation of the world by him in which Creation he enlightneth every man that comes into the world He was in the world and the world was made by him these being the words immediately following that expression of enlightning every man c. It s cleare as can be that that light is that which was implanted in the soules in the first Creation Now that this light which in the first Creation was implanted in the soule and so is in every man that comes into the world is 1 Neither Christ 2. Nor a Knowledge of Christ as Mediator 3. Nor is a light sufficient to bring to Gospel salvation we shall fully cleare and so discover how miserably this Text is wrested by them Lâ—ght in all mâ—â—â—â—â— not Christ in all men 1. That that light there spoken of which is implanted in the soule in the first Creation is not Christ wiâ—l thus appeare First It s a light Created by Christ in the soule and so cannot be Christ himselfe unlesse they will blasphemously affirme Christ to create himselfe 2 For this light with which he enliâ—â—â—nâ—th the soule most either be by creation or by hypostaticall union viz. by the dwellingâ— of the Divinity of Christ in every man as he was personally in the humane nature when the Word was made Flesh and dwelt amongst as which how horrid a blasphemy were it to assert and how loathsome would it be to any that knowes but the first Principles of the Gospel And here we must againe tell Iames Nayler of his wicked blasphemy in affirming that Christ as Man dwells in him which though we proved against him in the Booke he pretends to answer yet he wholly passeth that over in silence without a tittle of exception which we cannot but interpret as his confession that it is his Principle Light in all gives yet no knowledge of a Meâ—iator 2. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted the soule is not a Knowledge of Christ as Mediator we shall thus evidence 1. First This was the light of the first covenant viz. a covenant of workes which did not aâ— all hold forth or make out a Mediator for it was that light which was given forth in the first creation in which Adam stood onely under a covenant of workes neither needed a Mediator before his fall upon which fall the first light of a Mediator broake out in a promise The Seed of the Woman shall breake the Serpents head as in Gen. 3 15â— ver 2. The knowledge of Christ as Mediator the Scripture parely holds forth as a matter of meer Revelation given forth by God in the second covenant and not implanted in the soule in its first creation Mat. 13.11 to you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdme of Heaven but to them it is not given If Christ doe enlighten every man in the Knowledge of himselfe as a Mediator how then comes this Scripture to speake so distinguishingly to you it is given to them it is not given which exception of Christ doth clearely deny the quakers universality that it s given to all To thiâ— is parallell that of Christ to Peter when by the Fathers peculiar revelation he understood Iesus to be Christ Mat. 16.17 Blessed art thou Simon bar Iona for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee but my Father where he cleares Peters Knowledge of Christ as Mediator not to be from any principle of light crâ—ated or naturall Knowledge but from a peculiar revelation f om the Father and pronounceth him blessed upon the account of that distinguishing discovery How fully doth that place of Paul for ever dash any pretence to a power to know Christ as a Mediator by that naturall light which is in every man that comes into the world 1 Cor. 2.14 the naturall man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnesse unto him neither can
he know them for they are discerned spiritually There the Apostle gives the reason why no light implanted in our natures in the creation can discerne the things of the spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned where he makes an opposition betwixt naturall and spirituall light and puts an impossibility upon discovering Christ by the light of Nature We may adde that ver 9.10 Eye hath not seene Eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of man to conceive c. but God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit 3. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted in the soule is not a knowledge of Christ as a Mediator will appeare by undenyable examples for there are multitudes of men and women without contradiction never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator though it must be confessed they had a rationall or naturall light Those thousands of Saints that went over into new England fully experienced it that there is not the least hint of a Christ implanted in those Indians one of us having often conversed amongst them can also fully witnesse it as is more fully also evident by the confessions of many of them in Print who have been converted by the Ministry of Mr. Eliot of which we spake in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 19. But may not these Scriptures fully confound these mens pervertings of that Scripture Reade Psal 143.19 He shewd his Word unto Iacob his statutes and judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any people and as for his judgements they have not knowne them Psal 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the Heathen that have not knowne thee Col. 1.26 the disponsation of God is given to fulfill the Word of God even that mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations But let Paul determine the contrary to whose judgement we shall desire to stand 2 Thes 3.2 All men have not Faith Light in all not sufficient to save 3. That this light which by Christ in creating of the world is implanted in man is not sufficient to bring to a Gospel salvation is also plaine from what we have convincingly proved that this naturall light may be in thousands that never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator and Iohn 17.3 this is life eternall to know thee the very God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent So that there is an utter insufficiency and incapacity in this light to bring to salvation So that though A. P. hath lately expressed his abhorring the distinction betwixt naturall and spirituall light yet our Lord Iesus and the Apostles are so full in it that they are of more authority with us then the novell opinion of A. P. Thus you see this Scripture fully vindicated from their wrestings for hence it is apparent that though Iesus Christ by whom the Father made the world Heb. 1.2 in his creation of man did enlighten and create a principle of light and naturall reason and understanding in the soule which we have proved is eminently there understood yet this proves nothing for the Quakers that either therefore every man that hath a reasonable soule Christ dwells in him or that he knowes Christ or that his naturall light can possibly suffice to bring to Gospel salvation Excep 4 Naylers next defence is this ridiculous argument If Christ be not in the most vile in the world c how shall he judge every one according to their thoughts as well as according to what they doe must he proceed as carnall Iudges doe by proofe or confession and no further Reply We need say no more to shew the simplicity of this argument then to aske them these questions Doth the Scripture say that Christ is in the Devills and yet he sees and knowes and judgeth them Or doth the Scripture say that the damned in Hell Christ is in them Nay but doth not Scripture speake in this language Christ in you the hope of glory Col 1 27. so that Scripture speaking of Christ in you speaks of him as being the hope of glory where he dwells And is Christ in Devils and damned soules the hope of glory For geâ—â—â—er the Quakers nor we are in this controversie at all disposinâ— concerning the abiquity of the Divine Nature by reason of which he is above all and through all and 〈◊〉 all But of Christ in us in that sense the Gospel useth the expression viz. as a saving light and principle the hope of glory 2. How ridiculous is it from Christs knowing all things to inferre that he dwells in all can he not know things unlesse he dwell in them Doth he not know the inward motions of Brutes Horses Fishes c. and is it Scripture Language from thence to inferre his dwelling in them Oh! the vainenesse and frothinesse of such a spirit and how are these men given up to blasphemy We shall conclude with that of David Psal 11.4 The Lord is in his holy temple the Lords throne is in Heaven his eyes behold his eye-lids try the children of men He hath another argument that Christ dwells in the Saints which we know in its Gospel sense but not in Naylers that Christ as man dwells in them but how absurdly and un-scripturally doth this conclusion follow therefore Christ doth dwell in all Thus you see our proofes fully confirmed his lyes confuted his perverted Scriptures cleared and answered and the folly of his arguments fully opened though he hath not answered one of our arguments and many Scriptures against that Doctrine Position 5. That Christ in the Flesh with all he did and suffered therein was but a Figure and nothing but an Example Excep 1 O deceitfull spirits c. are those words expressely found in Sauls Errand to Damascus as you say they are let that Booke be witnesse against you and your lying slanders to all that reade it Reply Surely this man pretends neither to conscience nor modesty that doth challenge us here for a lye for saying that Doctrine was expressely found in Sauls Errand He that shalâ— but looke upon that Booke pag. 2. pag 8. pag. 14. shall begin to know the impudence of Iames Nayler pag. 2. 9. line last in the schedule annaxed to the Lancashire Petition to the Councell of State you have this charge Richard Hubbethorn wrote that Christs comming in the Flesh was but a Figure Now are we lyars in affirming those words are expressely found there Nay further in pag. 8. where Hubbethorne answers to that charge we will give you his owne words Christ in his people is the substance of all figures types and shadowes fulfilling them in them but as he is held forth in the Scripture-letter without them and in the flesh without them he is their example or figure which is both one that the same things might be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Iesus Could a man have spoken more plainely to affirme what we asserted of him And doe we adde our
Papists and quâ—keâ—s about justification This is the old thread bare shâ—fâ—lle of the Papists when they are prest by the Protestants and their justification by workes or inherent holinesse is confuted by Scripture they constantly answer as Nayler doth they deny their being justified by their owne workes which flow from a Princip e oâ— their owne power but say that the workes by which they are justified are such as flow from grace or the workings of God within their soules They say that by the first Bell. de justif l. 1. c. 19 ne hominem justificare pâ—sse men cannot be justified but per opera qua ex fide Christi gratiâ fluunt homines justificari by the workes which flow from Christ All this while both Papists and Quakers allâ—â—â— justification by inherent holinesse not by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely they pretend it is not by their owne power The full confutation of which Popâ—sh and Anti-christian Doctrine we have layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee at large pag. 11. and to which Nayler according to his wonted presumptuous confidence answers nothing Position 8. That God and man cannot be wholly reconciled till he brought into the state of the first Adam and able in his owne power to stand perfect Excep 1 Nayler first excepts against this assertion that the Booke shall witnesse against us and sayes mans being able to stand in his owne power was never spoken by him nor thought by him and sayes that though the word be twice repeated to stand in Gods power yet they are not ashamed to wrest it to their owne power c. Reply 1 1. To this we answer that the Booke which he saith shall witnesse against us hath not so much as once the words to stand in Gods power though Nayler say those words are twice repeated for the quaere is in these words Whether God created Man and Woman perfect without sinne and able in his power to have stood if they had not forsaken his power and consented to the wisedome of the Serpent The nature of the power of the first Adam considered 2. From these words We considering the nature of the state of the fi st Adam to which Nayler sayes man must be brought before he be reconciled could not but gather that standing in mens owne power must be the sense of those words Our reason is plaine For That power which Adam had to stand in his state of perfection was given to him as the Prodigals portion into his owne hand but the power that the Saints now are to stand by is a power in the hand of the Lord Iesus given to him as a feoffee in trust for in this lyes the difference of the power in the sons of men in the first and second Adam our standing in the second Adam being by a power and support in the hands and dispose of the Lord Iesus by reason of which it is alone that none can plucke us out of the Fathers hands Ioh. 10. And the standing of the first Adam being by that portion of power which was intrusted in his owne hands without any promise of assistance or perseverance from God So that it is apparent that when Nayler saies Man must be brought into the state of the first Adam before he be reconciled he must meane he must be able to stand in his owne power without any engagement of support from God for thaâ— was undeniably the state of Adams power Let Nayler shew us a tittle out of Scripture where Adam had any thing of promise or assistance for his standing more then the power he had in his own hands which was his owne power 3. If yet Nayler will shuffle that this is not one of the Doctrines of the Quakers we shall further convincingly cleare it from the very words of George Fox in a Booke entituled To all that would know the way to the Kingdome pag. 10. he profanely and like a perfect Atheist scoffes at the grace of God saying thus And to you that tempt God and say Lord give us a sight of our sins c. this light within you lets you see it so you need not tempt God to give you a sight of your sins Foxes horrible â—eering at the graâ—e of God for ye know enough c. and give over tempting of God to give you a sight of your sins And to all yee that say God give us grace and we shall refraine from our sins there yee have got a tempting customary word for the free grace of God hath appeared unto all men c. Hence thou seest Fox most wretchedly asserting these two things 1. That to pray for sight of sinne and for power from sinne is a tempting of God 2. That to pray for light and power for the discovery of sinne and refraining from it are needlesse for so he saith yee need not tempt God to give you a sight of sinne and cease from saying God give us grace for the grace of God hath appeared to all men so that he plainely affirmes that all men have both a light and power also that they need not be beholding to God to give them nor to aske them of him for he addes the reason Why you need not aske it of God for you have a light within you and you know enough c. Begging of lâ—ght and power the Saints duty What a wretched Principle is this and how câ—â—trary to plaine Scripture If any man lack Wisedome let him askâ— it of God Iames 1.5 where the Apostle bids the poore creature to beg wisedome of God though Fox scoffe at it Open thaâ— my eyes that I may see Psal 119.18 Give me understanding 〈◊〉 34.31.32 Surely it is meet to be sâ—â—d unto God that which I see not teach thou me 1 Peter 5.10 where Peter prayer the God of all grace mâ—ke you pe fect stabâ— sh strengthen settle 〈◊〉 Ephes 3 14.16 for this cause I bow my kâ—eâ—s 〈◊〉 the Fathe◠〈◊〉 our Lord Iesus that he would grant you to be strengthned 〈◊〉 might by his spirit Every good and every perfect gif◠〈◊〉 downe from above from the Father of lights Iames 1. â—er 17 Now here you may see the practice of the Sain s and the wickednesse of Foxes profane jeering at the grace of God with sending men to theiâ— owne light and power in oppositiâ—â— to the grace of God and how all the lyes that Nayler chargeth on us while he denyes this Position doe fully fall upâ—â— his owne head while it is as confidenâ—ly affeâ—ted by the gâ—◠〈◊〉 Master of this Babylonish mystery The second exception is this You that say that Adam 〈◊〉 the state of innocency was under a covenant of workes make it appearâ— to all that know Adams state that you never knew it for the Law wherein is the covenant of workes was added after c. Reply Adam in innocence under a covenant of vvorkes What we have said at large about Adams being
shall we escape if we neglect the Word which at first began to be spoken by the Lord. 4. Is not this also this fancy of perfection the great root of that great sinne against the Gospel of selfe-righteousnesse which the Apostle so much declares against Rom. 9.31.32 Rom 10.2.3 Gal. 5.4 for such is the remaining pride that is in every one that if they have any thing to glory in they will set it up as their Idoll in their hearts 5. How can sinne be mourned over and mortified when neither owned nor discovered We finde blessed Paul a Saint of another Principle then James Nayler pretends to he good man complaines of an imperfect state 1 Cor. 13.12 I see but in part he mourns over the body of his death Rom. 7.24 Oh! wretched man that I am who shall deliver me But how shall we expect this from such as hide their eyes from their bosome sinnes there can be no sense of an unseen an unfelt an unacknowledged sinne What is the reason why so little mourning and mortifying is it not blindnesse and want of discerning sinne in the exceeding sinfulnesse of it in mens hearts 6. This is to take away the end of Christs convincing men of sinne which is that free grace may superabound Rom. 5.20 What made Paul to cry out of the exceeding abundance of grace 1 Tim. 1.15 but the exceedingnesse of his sinnes I am the chiefe of sinners David though a man after Gods owne heart yet the sight of his great sins after he was in a justified state this is that which makes him cry out to the multitude of Gods tender mercies for pardon Psal 51.1 according to thy loving kindnesse according to the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions c. How shall a Quaker see any glory in pardoning grace as to its dayly coverings of their weaknesses when they say they are perfect and doe not sinne at all The quakers sinnes discovered notwithstanding their pretence and pleading for perfection 7. This fancy of their perfections is the hiding from their poore deluded soules of those sinnes which they are evidently under the power of in the eyes of any spirituall observer For though they cry up their owne perfections yet who knows not the sinfulnesse of their selfe-righteousnesse of their many blasphemies Heresies denying the Lord that bought them raylings pride lying reproaching of the pretious Ordinances of the living God and Messengers of Jesus Alas what observant eye doth not reade these evidently in their bookes writings words behaviours Now who knowes not if Scripture be true these are wofull corruptions and damning sinnes And shall their fancy of perfection be a covering to such abominations as these No no the Prophet Isaiah will tell them otherwise Isa 28.20 the bed is shorter then that a may can stretch himselfe on it and the covering narrower then that he can wrap himselfe in it Nay their very pleading they are perfect convinceth them of sin ☜ For Job a man of excellency and holines beyond any of them saith chap. 9.20.21 If I justifie my selfe my owne mouth shall condemne me if I say I am perfect it shall also prove me perverse though I were perfect yet would I not know my soule But such broken reeds will one day peirce their hands when the King of terrours shall arrest the body and the sorrowes of death shall compasse them about then their perfection will appeare to be a dreame Oh! that Nayler would thinke of that of Bellarmine who had long disputed for a perfection of holinesse but when he came to dye then he came to see somewhat of the raggs of his owne righteousnesse and cryed out Lord have mercy on me not according to my workings but according to thy mercies in Jesus Christ Reader if God ever open these mens eyes they will then see the need of the blood of Christ when the flames of wrath shall be burning up their straw and stubble but if the spirit of slumber shall keep them in blindnesse and in bondage still that they cannot see and will not owne their imperfection yet when Christ shall coâ—e in flaming fire how shall their righteousnesse shrivell together as a scrowle and be like stubble before the flame then will the vanity of that Quakers expressions be layd open That holy and close walking with God is a Saints covering frâ—m the wrâ—â—◠〈◊〉 God Oh! let the Reader Psal 2.12 Kisse the Sonne lest he be angry when his wrath is kindled â—â—t a little blessed are all they that trust in him E As to this matter of perfection the summe of the rest of his answer is to pleade for perfection here from these considerations That this is the end of Christs comming to present us perfect that not one jot or tittle of the Law must passe till all be fulfilled Rom. 8.3.4 That God sent his Sonne that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us and to dispute against perfection here is to make the commands of Christ and endeavours of the Saints of none effect Reply 1 Iohn 3.8 opened How Christ destroyes the vvorks of the devill 1. As for the first that Christ destroyes the worke of the Devill 1 Iohn 3.8 and to this end was made manifest We answer 1 Christ destroyed the workes of the Devill for his people upon the Crosse Col. 2.14.15 and having spoyled Principalities and Powers he made a shew of them openly tryumphing over them in it Heb. 2.14 Christ himselfe tooke part of flesh and blood that by death he might destroy him that had the power of death viz. the Devill Doe we then by denying perfection of inherent holinesse in this life make voyd the end of Christs comming thus to destroy the workes of the Devill nay we establish it for by discovering of imperfection we send them to glory alone in Christ crucified Gal. 6.14.2 Christ destroyes the workes of the Devill in his people also and this is the constant carrying on of mortification in their hearts with his owne spirit whereby he takes away the doimnion and raigne of sinne Rom. 6.14 As in Paul who though he had the spirit of Christ and the dominion of sinne removed and Christ dayly destroying the workes of the Devill in him yet still he had a Law in his members warring against the Law of his minde Rom 7.23 yet there was the spirit lusting against the flesh and the flesh against the spirit Thus Christ exerciseth his conquering power in the conflicts of his Saints Now though sinne in Paul where not wholly removed or destroyed at present yet did not Christ lose this end of his being made manifest For first as he had it in part in his dayly conquering So secondly he will have it in fulnesse in his owne appointed time when the soule shall see him face to face then that which is in part shall be done away and not till then as is cleare 1 Cor. 13.9.10 3. There are ends of
there needs no outward discovery wish the Reader to observe That it is not onely the Publishing of the Gospel by the Ministry that Nayler cryes downe in this as uselesse but also the very Scriptures the written word it selfe being an outward discovery must by the same reason be asserted needlesse Here is the Religion of these men that pretend so much to perfection and yet will not heare God in his Word Position 12. That there is no need of any outward teaching by Reading or Hearing the Scriptures opened or applyed c. The Reader by his answer may observe there is nothing said against our many proofes onely one shuffle about the expressions of Iohn Audland who we said affirmed No need of outward teaching which Nayler sayes is false for the words were He needed no man to teach him What a shufflle is this or doth this deny what we say doth he not say no need of outward teaching to himselfe But Nayler hath this but by report and the words were spoken in our hearing Nayler also we observed in the last Position asserts the same fully in these words Where this light of Christ is there needs no outward light or discovery c. the rest of his answer is the grossest heape of rayling and lying as we have seen His rayling will appeare to all that reades it and his lying is as full For he saith These promises you give to them that are in the first birth sow pillowes under every arme-hole you Preach them up all Beleevers except some that refuse to give you hire and them you prepare warre against you say men must commit sinne while they live c. who knowes not that knoweth us the falsenesse of these lyes which he speakes out so freely as if they were as true as could be But as their wickednesse is fully knowne so the Lord will in due time discover what shall be given to a false tongue Except There is onely produced by him these Scriptures Ier. 31.31.32.33 Heb. 8 10.11 they are both the same They shall teach no more every man his neighbour or saying Know the Lord c. Reply 1 We answer That this promise doth only concerne the children of God as Nayler himselfe confesseth also it concernes them onely That great promise in Jer. 31.31 opened at large 1. The children of God onely are in everlasting covenant in the new covenant 2. They that shall be thus taught are such as have their sinnes pardoned Will Nayler say that every man hath his sinne pardoned he may as well affirme that all have their sins pardoned as affirme that this promise belongs to all So that as in the point of pardon all flesh must signifie not every man so it must be restrained also in the point of teaching to those all that are the people of God and are interessed in the mercy of this everlasting covenant 2. Though these people of God be thus taught of God yet this excludes not the use of outward â—eaching Reader besides the evidences of this we gave thee in foure arguments under our reply to his answer to the eleventh Position If thou wouldst take the paines to reade what we have Written in the Perfect Pharisee pag 21. 22. in which we have convinced the needlesnesse of outward teaching even to the best of Saints by plentifull arguments and above thirty undenyable plaine evident Scriptures thou wilt be fully satisfied and therefore we shall not trouble thee to repeate what we have said onely in a few words to open the meaning of the expression we shall adde 1. Know this promise was made good when the Saints were under outward teachings when the Apostles preached when Elders were set over the Churches when Faith came by hearing Rom. 10. For in those times the spirit was abundantly powred forth yea then was the time when their Sons and Daughters Prophesied so that it is a promise consisting with outward reaching 2. With how much willingnesse did the Saints when enjoying this promise attend the Apostle Doctrine Acts 2.42 3. Why doth the Apostle write to the Hebrewes to teach them if that were the meaning that no man should teach his neighbour 4. Nay doth he not say Heb. 5.12 Yeâ— have need that one teach you againe which be the first Principles of the Oraecles of God 5. Paul blames them for their forsaking their Church-assemblies Heb. 10.25 Yea 6. Commandâ— these Hebrews Remember them that have the rule over you wâ—eâ— have spoken to you the Word of God Heb. 13.7 And 7. Iud. ver 3. It was needfull for me to Write unto you and exhort you 8. Paul speaking of himselfe as to his Ministry sayes Phil. 1.24 to continue in the flesh is more needfull for you and what was it for but as to their instruction So that it plainely appeares this is not spoken to exclude outward Preachings but are to shew the abundance of spirituall Knowledge and light in Gospel-times comparatively with the dispensation the Iewes were under before the comming of the Lord Iesus But we have abundantly proved the sense is not cannot be to take away the needfulnesse of outward teaching VVarrant for division of Scripture into chapter and verse To excuse George Fox his jugling in a Concordance he fall to abuse the division of Scriptures into Chapters and Verses It seems he hath a minde to cast all the dirt he can upon any outward light though it be the Scriptures and though for nothing but this and he saith the Hireling Priests have done it to trade withall thus doth he ignorantly rayle though the Old Testament was so divided and distinguished long before the comming of Christ by the Masorites into chapter and verse about two hundred yeares before the comming of our Saviou and the most Learned say that they were that Ecclesiasticall Senate held by Ezra Haggai Zachariah and Malachy with divers others who amongst others their eminent services distinguished the Scriptures into sections and verses And as we finde none of the Apostles nor Christ himselfe disalowing that division so the Saints of God in our dayes have â—ound pretious advantage by thus methodizing Scripture though this man revile it under the name of the worke of Hirelings How he shuâ—fles in the rest about the Apostles Preaching and ordaining Eâ—ders will infoâ—â—e thee fully how the man was puzzled in that businesse and his last expressions of saying we tell men they must commit sinne will informe thee of his maliciousnesse He would insinuate to the Reader as if we pressed men to sinne We have said so much of this that we shall adde no more having fully cleared our pressing to all yea to the best to strive after grea er degrees of holinesse dayly and that they must struggle after that perfection which yet they doe not enjoy but we see the man is vexed and so we leave him to calme his spirits We have been very full also as to proâ—e the necessity of teaching to which thou
mayst observe he answers nothing and thereby see the spirit of those men that doe stop their eyes against the plainest light but he that hardeneth his heart shall not prosper Position 13. That the Scriptures are not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth He answers nothing according to his custome to our arguments nor excepts against our proofes but labours to confirme the Position Excep 1 Christ is the Word now if the Scriptures be the Word then there is two Words of God now prove that in Scripture or that the Letter is â—aked the Word in plaine words Reply 1. That Christ is the Word is plaine Iohn 1. and who knoweth it not The essentiall and declarative Word not all one 2. That the will of God contained in the Scripture is the Word of God is as plaine besides the Scriptures we named â—n the Perfect Pharisee pag. 24. Marke 7.13 Luke 11 28. Rom. 10.17 Iohn 12.48 we shall adde these Luke 8.11 the Seed is the Word of God ver 12. then commeth the Devill and taketh the word out of their heart least they should beleeve and be saved can the Devill take Christ out of their hearts 1 Thes 2.13 When yee receaved the Word of God which you heard of us yee received it not as the Word of Men but as it is in truth the Word of God c. This was the Word which the Apostles spake yea received it which cannot be meâ—nt of Christ he should have said yee received him not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God This is so plaine a case we shall not trouble thee further And here thâ—u mayst observe there are two words of God the essentiall and 〈◊〉 declarative and wonder the man should be so weake as to bid 〈◊〉 produce Scripture to prove this when the Scripture is so full of it to any that doth but reade it Excep 2 The Apostle calls what he wrote a Declaration 1 â—ohn 1.2.3 Reply How doth this prove the Scriptures are noâ— the word of God nay doth it not fully prove the contrary for that which he declares was what he had heard of the Lord Iesus Scriptures not onely a declaration of the conditions of Saints Againe we doe owne the Scriptures to be the declarative Word of God or a declaration of the minde of God but we say the Quakers doe destroy the Scriptures Divinity and authority when they call them onely a declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth For as we prâ—ved before 1 They shall be then no foundation for the Faith of Saints for one mans condition is not the foundation of another mans Faith 2. The Scripture shall have no authority over the soule of any but he that is in the same condition and hath experienced it contrary to Iohn 2.4 8. this is the reason why Nayler sayes they are not commanded to forbear to weare shâ—oes in his Book p. 21. if they were they should as well as they are commanded not to sâ—lute whereas that command if it be in any part binding Luke 10.4 requires both but this will tell thee what is meant by their calling Scripture a speaking forth of the Saints condition viz. it shall have no authority over them further then they list or have an impulse on their spirits or they practice for both the commands are of equall authâ—rity yet he denyes they are commanded one of them nay they are both in the same verse Luke 10.4 Yea 3. This destroyes the divine authority of all Historicall and Propheticall Scripture which could not be the Saints conditions when thâ—y spoke them as also threatnings and promises c But see this at large Perfect Pharisee pag. 24.25 We sha l say but this 1 Iohn 5.16 There is a sinne unto death I doe not say that you should pray for it was this Iohns condâ—â—ion when he spake it did he exper ence in his heart that he had sinned to death 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is returned to his vomit c. was this the condition of Peter that spoke it but we are ashamed of this wickednesse and folly of these men Excep 3 VVhereas you say it cannot be understood to be the word Christ that came to the Prophets Samuel Ieremy c it seems your understanding is not with the Apostle who saith It was the Spirit of Ch i st that was in them 1 Peter 1 11 and you say what Christ and his Apostles Preached c. was not Christ the Father or Spirit when as the Scripture saith Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. cap. 1 ver 21. Reply The Quakers grossâ— confounding of Christ with the written VVord 1 Consider Reader how grossely he abuseth and perverts the Scripture to prove that the words that they spoke were Christ and the spirit because it is said These holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost What a grosse and blasphemous conâ—ounding is here of the word that those men spoke and the holy Ghost that moved them to speake making the word spoken by a finite creature to be the everlasting spirit the holy Ghost The words were committed to Paper and Inke Rev. 1. Heb. 2.2 engraven in Tables 2 Cor. 3.7 Isay 30 8. write it before them in a Booke note it in a Booke c. can this be Christ or the Spirit of God and yet these are the things which they were moved of the holy Ghost to write Who knoweth not that it was the spirit of God that moved them to write that revealed the things they were to publish to the world but were those things that the holy Ghost moved them to write were those things Christ were those things the spirit What a miserable ignorance or judiciall blindnesse is this which certainely the righteous judgement of God hath given up this Generation of people to because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved Position 14. That the Spirits are not to be tryed by the Scriptures c. This Position is not denyed by Nayler we proved it from three testimonies and Nayler in his answer addes his owne defence thereof without exception against any of our proofes VVe shall take his arguments for defence thereof in order Excep 1 The infallible spirit which is the originall of all Scriptures is the tryall of all spirits and that spirituall man judgeth all things and by that spirit the Saints was to judge of all spirits and gave those up to Sathan that was for that end as is plaine 1 Cor. 5 4. Reply 1 The spirit not to be set in opposition to Scripture The force of this argument by which he would prove that spirits are not to be tryed by Scripture lyeth thus The infallible spirit is the tryall of all spirits therefore spirits are not to â—e tryed by Scriptures To
which we reply That this is no consequence at all and shall demonstrately prove it from these severall arguments 1. To set the minde and will of the spirit in opposition to the spirit it selfe can be no Gospel argument For the Scriptures are the infallible will of the spirit layd downe as the rule of Saints beleeving judging and walking What a reproach had it been when the spirit of God sent the Prophets to reveale his will or when Jesus Christ sent the Iewes to search the Scriptures what a reproach had it been to the living God for them to have answered We will not be judged not will we judge of spirits or doctrines by that Word or Scripture we will stand to the judgement of the spirit it selfe opposing the spirit it selfe to its owne will How wicked a thing had it been in them and how ridiculous an answer is this in Nayler 2. How is this to undervalue the wisedome of the holy Ghost himselfe Bereans commended for trying spirits by Scriptures Acts 17.11 who judgeth and pronounceth the Bereans more Noble then those of Thessaloniea in that they searched the Scriptures dayly whether those things that were spoken by Paul and Silas were so or no in that they searched the Scriptures the Spirit prizeth them for trying the Doctrines of Paul and Silas by the Scripâ—uâ—es the written Word And how wicked a thing is this in the Quakers to cry downe this trying of spirits and Doctrines of Scriptures which the spirit expressely ownes with such a signall testimony as speaking out in the soule such a spirituall noblenesse 3. It is confessed on all hands that the eternall Spirit is the originall of Scriptures and the tryer of Spirits who ever questioned that But our question is what the Saints are to try the spirits by not whether the spirit can try the Doctrines No. But we affirme that this eternall Spirit hath left the written Word as that which shall be the discovery touchstone and tryall of spirits and Doctrines by authority and divine warrant from himselfe See 2 Pet. 1.21 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 3 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God c. John 5.99 Search the Scriptures Isay 8.20 c. So that our asserting the Scriptuâ—es to be tryall of spirits is but setting up the spirit in his owne authority and throne over the spirits and consciences of men and pleading with men that the spirit may rule in his owne way and that they will try Doctrines by that Scripture which the holy Ghost commands them to try the Doctrines by And he that refuseth that touchstone which the spirit hath layd dâ—wne for tryall doth destroy the authority of the holy Ghos â—et hâ—m speake fantastically of trying by the spirit what he will But this reasoning of Naylers is as if when the Loâ—d Protector should declare what is treason by Law in publique Proclâ—mations a Justice of Peace should when a Person were proved before him guilty of treason according to that Law yet should say he is not to judge what is treason according to that Law but he would appeale from the Law to himselfe for what is treason though the Law had determined it before But in this case to exclude the Scriptures because the holy Ghost is the originall of them is to destroy that plaine truth Subordinate non pugnant things that act in a subordination though about the same thing doe not destroy one anothers usefulnesse or causality Nay the spirits being the Originall of all Scripture this being confessed doth necessarily confesse their divine authority for that trying of spirits for which they were given forth by the inspiration of God 2. As to that expression the spirituall man judgeth all things we have fully spoken before in pag. 79. We know there is a spirit of discerning which Beleevers have of Gospel mysteries but what absurdity is this to inferre therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures For that light which a spirituall man hath is a Scripture light 1 Cor. 5.4 opened 3. How ignorantly is that 1 Cor. 5.4 produced to prove this assertion when Paul sayes In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when you are gathered together and my spirit to deliver such an one to Sathan c. Paul is not trying of spirits or judging of Doctrines but exhorting the Church to excommunicate the incestuous Person and tells them That his Apostolicall power shall goe along with them in that sentence The verse going before tells you what is the meaning of his spirit where he sayes I as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed that is I in this Epistle doe send you my mind and my judgement what you ought to doe with this man that hath committed Incest as fully as if I were present with you and so you may goe on at your meeting to excommunicate him having for so doing not onely the authority of the Lord Jesus but also the conseâ—t and iudgement of me his Apostle This is that in those words In the name of the Lord Jesus and my Spirit How doth this man heape up quotations without any understanding of the minde of the spirit in them and with what exceeding ignorance doth he apply such Texts to his absurdities as neither prove them nor speake a tittle concerning them Excep 2 By this spirits were the spirits tryed before the letter was therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures Reply What a miserable non sequitur is here There was a time when the spirit had not given forth the Written Word therefore when the spirit doth give forth a written Word it is not to be regarded There was a time when the Law was not engraven in Tables of Stone therefore when it was engraven the Israelites must not looke upon it as a rule of life or judgement There was a time when the will of God was not written was not Scripture therefore when Christ bids you search the Scriptures you need not heed them at all But we leave the Reader to laugh at this absurd consequence The Bereans judged by another light then James Nayler doth who though they knew there was a time when Scripture was not written yet they tryed the spirits and doctrines of Paul and Salas by the Scriptures And the Spirit it selfe inspired and moved holy men of God to write the Scriptures to leave them as a tryall and touchstone of spirits though once there was a time when there was no written word But oh how doth God infatuate men when they will not submit to the authority of his Word Excep 3 He falls a rayling exceedingly and sayes We have no guide but the letter because we assert the authority of Scripture and addes how many minds how many formes how many gods doe ye worship and all pretend Scripture If it be possible to
rake up a reason out of a heape of rayling this it is Those that doe uphold the Scriptures to be the tryall of Doctrines doe yet differ amongst themselves therefore the Spirits or Doctrines are not to be tryed in Scriptures Reply Quakers Popish argument This as many other of their answers is a knowne thread-bare Popish argument they say You Protestants cannot agree in your Discipline and therefore the Scriptures are not to be the judge of Doctrines but the infallible spirit of the Pope We hope God will discover them ere lonâ— to be men meerely acted by the spirit of Anti-christ but we shall give you a full answer under these two considerations Difference in non-fundamentals no prejudice to the Scriptures being judge of spirits 1. First as it reflects upon our selves We say to differ in discipline is not to worship severall gods as Nayler rayles while it is knowne we hold the head the Lord Jesus but this we looke upon as the spitting of his venome When Peter was for Circumcision and Paul was against Circumcision Gal. 2.13.14 did they worship severall gods So those Acts 15. that contested in different judgements did they worship severall gods But this man cares not what he sayes so be may throw his dirt upon us though he bewray his excessive ignorance in it before the world 2. As it fights against the Scriptures being the judge and tryall of spirits we shall shew there is no strength in this exception at all For the Scripture loseth not its authority for the tryall of spirits by reason of the darkenesse and different apprehensions of spirits How darke were the Apostles in the Prophesies of Christs Resurrection Luke 24 25. Fooles and flow of heart to beleeve all that the Prophets have spoken c. yet the Scriptures lost not their touchstone authority upon the account of their darkenesse though Christ saw thâ—t truth of the Resurrection in the Scriptures spoken of which they could not apprehend ought not Christ ver 26. to have sâ—ffoâ—ed these things and to enter into his glory Doth not Peter say plainely that in the writings of Paul there are 2 Pet 3.10 difficult things and hard to be understood and such as the unstable and unlearned rest and yet those Writings and Epist es doe not lose their authority because of the diversities and darkenesse of Beleevers thoughts Scripture rightly understood will clearely discover every spirit and every Doctrine though the best of men knowing but in part 1 Cor. 13.9 and so not fully taking in the genuine sense of Scripture may have through their darkenesse difference of judgement in things lesse fundamentall But we may be weary in following such triviall arguments onely we would not have the saints entrapped in any of Satans snares nor the blessed word that 's sweeter then hony and the hony combe subjected to the delusions of evill men Thus we have given thee the strength of his answer onely he addes his false glosse upon that of Isay 8.20 Isay 8.20 vindicated by us objected against them in the Perfect Pharisee the glosse is this Whereas you quote that place To the Law and to the testimony it is true the Law of the new Covenant is written in the heart by God and the testimody of Jesus is the spirit of Prophesie and if any be not guided by and speake according to these it is because they have no light in them but without them But we answer As he plainly by this overturnes all Scripture and leaves no rule but the Law written upon mens hearts which we have confuted in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 25. so it is a grosse perverting of the text and truth for it is clearely spoken of the Written Word and the very next words expresseth it clearely If they speake not according to this Word the Hebrew is full beyond exception cedabar hazzeh according to this Word so that that text is no reference that God makes to the Law written upon mens hearts but to the Law written in Tables of stone which tables were called the testimony and the Arke thereof called the Arke of the testimony Exod. 25.22 because the Tables of stone in which the Law was written called Exod. 31.18 the tables of the testimony were layd up there We have fully showne in the Booke called the Perfect Pharisee pag. 26. the sad fruits of this Doctrine of denying the Scripture to be the rule of trying doctrines and spirits that it is to open a gap to all the delusions of Satan and we instanced sin the knowne case of Iohn Gilpin who was sometimes a Quaker to which Nayler replyes onely thus It is no more then if the chiefe priests should have cited Iudas to confute Christ c. as he consulted with the priests to betray the truth so Iohn Gilpin hath done now who shall receive his reward and you priests also as Nayler sayes To which rayling we thus answer Shaking off the Sâ—ripture tâ—e â—â—ler to Satans delusions 1. That Iohn Gilpin was thus acted by the Devill is a known truth beyond questioning 2. That he did verily beleeve he was acted by Christ when yet the Devill acted him is very apparant Nay Atkinson the boy that pretends to answer that reâ—ation of Gilpin doth all along confesse that he was acted by the Devill is plaine to any that reades that his childish â—nd non-sensicall piece of rayling 3. Iohn Gilpin himselfe â—â—ee the Lord hath delivered him in mercy out of the snares of Satan hath fully confest that it was the spirit of Satan and not the Lord Iesus that then acted him 4 And that all this grew â—ut of his casting off the Scriptures searching to a light within Take his owne words pag. 15. of a Booke called The Quakers shaken It was most just with God to give me over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes c. as for other provocations sâ— especially for rejecting the revealed will of God in his Word and heaâ—kning onely to a Voyce within me nay not onely to l sten to the Devils suggestions but to embrace his Voyce for the Voyce of Christ Thou seest now Reader what reason we had to say this rejecting the Scriptures from being the tryer of Doctrines doth open an unavoydable gap to Satans delusions 2. But what reason hath the man to say in this both Iohn Gilpin and we have consulted against Christ Nay have we not been pleading for Christ against Iudas the desperate betrayen of his truth and Gospel while we have been discovering â—he subtilties of Satan in those that are acted by him and pleading for the authority of Christ in his word against all the delusions of the Devill And as we can thankefully and comfortably looke upon it that God hath engaged us in so good a work so we can looke for our reward not what Nayler we beleeve could wish us but how can he defie when God hath not defied but what Christ hath promised to them that can
forsake their names and comforts c. for his testimony It is no small slandâ—â— to say we have consulted with John Gilpin whose face none of us ever saw to our knowledge till after the Printing of his confession but there is a day wherein God will call every idâ—e word to an account and then Naylers conceit of his perfection will not take off the guilt of such apparant lyes Position 15. That there ought to be no sense meaning or exposition given or studying of the Scriptures We had many proofes for this that it was a Position of thâ— Quakers which he denyes not we could adde more but ' tiâ— needlesse because Nayler in his answer goes about to justifie it 〈◊〉 the summe of which lyes in these two exceptions Excep 1 The Scriptures are either perfect or not perfect if perfect lâ—â— them alone and doe not darken them by your invented wisedome Reply 1 Though Scripture be perfect in it selfe yet needs expounding through the darknet of soules To which we answer The Scriptures were given out perfect by the Prophets and Apostles yet they gave them out iâ— some places more darkely and in some places more clearely as Peter plainely confesseth 2 Pet. 3.16 that some things iâ— Pauls Epistles were hard to be understood and layd downe 〈◊〉 darkly as that those that were unlearned that is not well aâ—quainted with the mind of the holy Ghost in them did wrâ— them to their owne destruction which shewes the necessity opening and expounding Scriptures unlesse we will suffer mâ— through their ignorance to runne upon their owne ruine 2. Were the Scriptures imperfect or did Ezra adde to them because he gave the sense and caused them to understand the Reading Neh. 3.8 3. Doth not Christ speake the necessity of expounding Scripture though it be perfect when he said to the Pharisees Goe learne what that meaneth I will have mercy and not sacrifice Mat. 9.13 Nay doth not Christ clearly assert the necessity of expounding when he saith Marke 12.24 Doe yee not therefore erre not knowing the Scriptures Ver. 26 Have ye not Read in the Booke of Moses how God spake unto him in the Bush saying I am the God of Abraham c. he is not the God of the dead but the God of the living where he opâ—n the Scripture and proves the Resurrection from thence wh ch lay but darkely hid in those words had not he that had the Key of David opened and expounded them 4. The necessiâ—y of expounding doth not arise from the imperfection of Scriptures but from that darkenesse that lyes upon the spirits of the saints For now we see through a glasse darkely 1 Cor. 13. so that though the Scriptures be perfect in them elves yet thou seest the necessity of the opening of them through the imperfectiâ—n that is in us This Christ and the Apostles knew when they made it a great part of their businesse in the teaching of soules to expound the Scriptures Excep 2 You that have not that infallible spirit that gave them forth what will you judge and open and expound them with c. Reply This is but an old straine of his railing but we can let prayses be to free grace say with the Apostle God hath revealed them unto us by the spirit by the light of which spirit we are taught to compare spirituall things with spirituall 1 Cor 2.13 and so to open the Scriptures for though we are the least of saints and Nayler thus revile us yet we can blesse God for the in dwellingâ— of the infallible spirit in us which communicates light to our soules in that measure that pleaseth him dividing to every man severally as he will The rest of that answer is a heape of bitter rayling which is no more to us then the chaffe before the wind or the Viper upâ—n Pauls hand which comes forth from the flaming of their contention James 3.6 and we can shake off as into the fire from whence it came Position 16. They cry downe Baptisme with Water and the Lords Supper as being but types and shadowes ceasing upon the appearance of Christ within them Excep 1 Though the generall charge lie and our many proofes which he doth not deny make it cleare that they cry downe all Baptisme with Water yet Nayler in his answer shuffles from that charge and falls to except against Infant Bapâ—isme Reply Reader we should willingly cleare up that Ordinance of Christ to thee but it hath bin so fully cleared in the learned writings of Mr. Marshall Mr. Baxter Mr. Blakâ— Mr. Siâ—enham c. 〈◊〉 are loath to fill up our Booke with the discussing and clearing 〈◊〉 that point it being already growne up to a bulke beyond 〈◊〉 thoughts and shall referre thee for satisfaction in thâ—se 〈◊〉 discourses But let the Reader observe that this is but a 〈◊〉 evasion of Nayler for our proofes doe evidently satisfie 〈◊〉 they cry downe all manner of Baptisme with Water no◠〈◊〉 the Baptizing of Infants but of all and its further appâ—â—â—â— by their practice Excep 2 But at last he speaks his mind and reasons against all â—â—â—tisme and quotes that of Paul 1 Cor. 4.14 Paul knew whaâ— he spake when he thanked God he had Baptized no more for Christ saith he sent me not to Baptize but to Preach Reply 1 1 Cor. 1 14 opened By these expressions Nayler seems to make Paul looke upon his Baptizing others as a sinne and so to thanke God that he Baptized no more How is this to heape sinne upon Peter and the rest of the Apostles who Baptized three thousand at one time Acts 2.41 Ierusalem and all Iudea went forth to John to be Baptized of him and yet Iesus himselfe made and Baptized more Disciples then Iohn See Iohn 4.1 though Iesus himselfe Baptized none but his Disciples what is this but to make â—â—ul condemne the practice of those saints and oppose the câ—â—mand of the Lord Iesus Goe and Baptize Mat. 28.19 2. But to give thee the full meaning of Pauls expression then shalt finde 1 Cor. 1.12 he is charging them for factions Ouâ— said I am of Paul another I am of Apollo c. and argues thus Were you Baptized in the name of Paul and thence takes occasion to blesse God for not having Baptized many lest any should from thence have growne into a Faction as himselfe gives the reason ver 15. lest any should say I have Baptized in my owne name and from thence have made a Faction so that he blesseth God that sith the Corinthians were growne of such Factions and dividing spirits that providence had so ordered it that they had by his Baptizing so few of them so little advantage to cry him or his name up in opposition to Apollos Christ or Cephâ—â— Yet by the history of the Acts of the Apostles thou mayst observe that when ever any were converted by Paul they were Baptized Acts 16.15 ver 33. Acts 18.8 many of the Corinthians
nothing a command till they judge it so How loose doe they hang in obedience to the Lord Jesus they will obey and not obey as they shall see cause Prayses be to our God that we have discovered them Now we understand the reason why Nayler answered none of our Scriptures we perceive he looked upon them as nothing to him and now we clearely see the meaning of their sâ—ufflingâ— about the Word of God and their scornefull expressions about the written Word c. So that we can boldly charge them from this place with this horrid blasphemy that the Quakers doe affirme ☜ That the Scriptures have no authority over their consciences at all nor any command in Scripture that was given to others that binds them save what command they have an impulse upon their owne spirits for This is the great strong hold of Satan and the snare with which he entraps them as he will From this Principle of theirs he goes about to prove the law fulnesse of people going naked and reviles us for speaking against it and sayes they doe it by particular command from God Reader thou mayst observe That Nayler denyes not what we wrote about their going naked in Perfect Pharisee pag. 48. the Wife of Edmund Adlington of Kendale going naked though the streets Nov. 21. 1653. We shall adde more because some that have lesse acquaintance with these people may seeme to make question of it On Munday October 28. 1653. there was one Thomas Holme of Kendale went as naked as he was borne through the Market place at Kirby Stephen on the market day at his turning he said Mark that It is not I but God that goeth naked c. and so after a time he went to his clothes which were kept in a Barne by foure men of his Sect. And to shew that this is a fact they justifie and pleade for in stead of mourning for the horrible sin of it Mr. Taylour a great ring-leader of that people came to that Towne the weeke after to seeke Mr. Higginson Minister of that place as he said having a Message to him from the Lord and being there in the Market place he very solemnely pronounced a woe against it for rejecting that Prophet of the Lord which he had sent to doe signes and wonders in it meaning as those that heard him did conceive that beast that went starke naked through the Towne a little before This we have from Mr. Higginson under his owne hand Thomas Castly January 10. 1653. went shamelessely naked as he was borne through the streets at Kendale Edmund Nubyes Wife went through Kendale naked except that she had a shift on and about the latter end of December last she came into the place of meeting of the Church at Kendale in the same posture Another of this Sect came in the same posture into Hutton Chappell at the time of exercise about the beginning of January Elizabeth Levens and Miles Newby went up the streets at Kendale in the same posture This we have attested from Mr. Walker a godly Minister at Kendale under his hand by Letters bearing date Ianuary 31. 1653. But were it needfull to prove it we could by sending into places where these converse fill thee with undeniable evidence hereof but its needlesse because Nayler denyeth it not but labours to justifie them in this sinfull practice As to the manifesting of the wickednesse hereof we shall give thee these considerations 1. No sooner had Adam and Eve fallen and were stripped of their Innocency but they saw themselves shamefully naked Gen 3.10 But God who knowes the working of corruption in the hearts of men after the fall he himselfe cloathed them lost their nakednesse should appeare ver 21. Vnto Adam also and to his Wife did the Lord God make Coats of Skins and cloathed them And doth not this manifest the will of God against going naked would he have cloathed them if he would have had them continue in that nakednesse 2 But that you may yet see further how odious being naked before others is in the sight of God the sad curse that Noah from the mouth of God layd upon Ham the Father of Canaan for not covering his Fathers nakednesse will appeare Gen. 9 22.23.24 c. Ham the Father of Canaan saw the Nakednesse of his Father and told his two Brethren without and Shem and Japhet tooke a garment and layd it upon both their shoulders and went backward and covered the nakednesse of their Fathers and their Faces were backeward and they saw not their Fathers nakednesse And Noah aweke from his Wine and knew what his younger Sonne had done to him and said Cursed be Canaan c. and he said Blessed be the God of Shem anh Canaan shall be his servant c. God shall enlarge Japheth and Canaan shall be his servant c. Where you see Ham is bitterly cursed and the curse entailed to all his Posteri y for that sinne of not covering his Fathers nakednesse And what then shall we thinke of such an expression as Mary Collison a Quaker in Kendale used to these that covered the nakednesse of the Wife of Edmund Adlington in the street at Kendale That they had hindered the worke of the Lord Oh! let them remember the curse of Ham and the blessing of Shem and Iapheth here expressed 3. The Apostle arguing to the care that one Saint ought to have over another doth it by a comparison of them with the body naturall and tells you 1 Cor. 12.23.24 those members of the body which we judge to be losse honourable upon these we bestow more abundant honour and our uncomely parts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Rom. 1.27 pudenda indecora membra instrumenta excretioni generationi destinata have more abundant comelinesse for our comely parts viz. Face Hands c. have no need marke that the uncomely parts needed yea they are such parts that as the Apostle phraseth it they lacked more abundant honour viz. lest their nakednesse and shame should appeare 4. In the 2. Sam. 10 4. When Hanâ—n the King of Amon had cut off the garments of Davids servants in the middle even to their buttockes c. and sent them away the men were greatly ashamed ver 5. and David in the sense of this Wicked act made warre against the men of Ammon and destroyed them so sensible was David of the wickednesse of this act of discovering the â—ckednesse of his servants 5. 1 Tim. 2.9 The Apostle wills that Women adorne themselves in modest Apparell with shamefastnesse and sobriety And we leave it to the Reader to consider whether either going naked or having nothing but their shift on be any wayes according to the modesty bashfulnesse and sobriety by the Apostle commanded in that place 6. To adde no more we shall conclude with laying before thee the wickednesse of this practice besides that impudence and immodesty even such as nature and ingenuity it selfe obhorres this
the nature of quaking owning it where there was any reall appearance of God to the Prophets and shewing a clear difference betwixt these divâ—ne repâ—ures and the Satanicall quakings of these men he answers nothing at all but onely cavils at a word Excep 2 That we say They call their Quaking their great perfection which he sayes is false c. Reply To which we answer We cannot but look upon that as the great perfection in the eyes of these men which they doe so much cry up and so much desire as such a pretious attainement W. C. One of us doth know that Cap Ward and Will. Cartmell did expresse their desires of it and their hopes to come under that condition Henry Houseman said speaking concerning quaking he was not come up to that perfection yet We might adde more but Iohn Gilpin tells you in Quakers Shaken p. 5 that he did earnestly desire that he might fall into quaking and trembling apprehending that he should thereby attaine to the immediate discoveries of God unto him And is not that perfection Why doth Nayler still charge us with slanders Practice 2. Rayling Except He would endeavour from Scripture to lay downe a warrant for his rayling and his reason is because Christ called the Iewes the children of the Devil c. The Apostle cals men dogs wolves c. Reply 1 We charged them with rayling at those persons they had never seen before telling them they were Devils damned they saw the Devil in their faces so that this appeares to be perfect rayling because not knowing the persons or actions of any such men nor any particular sinne by them yet they let fly their dreadfull censures at randome Thus we instanced in our Perfect Pharisee p. 46. in their rayling at Mr. H. T. Merchant of Newcastle calling him a Priest c. and Gorge Fox rayling at Mr. Nichols in Carlile p. 48. telling him he was an hypocrite though he had never seen his face nor knew his name Now how is this bottom'd upon Christs example or the Apostles who gave such expressions to none but such as they had particular knowledge of as to their sinne giving a reason for such titles 2. Those titles were given to wicked Herod and to the teachers of false Doctrines Phil. 3. 2 Pet. 2. and we have fully cleared it we hope to every mans conscience who is not filled with errour and prejudice that we are neither reproachers of Christ or his Doctrine but according to our talent have found mercy of the Lord to be faithfull in carrying on the interest of the Lord Iesus and therefore we cannot but looke upon it as their sinfull practice in powring out such language upon us 3. He that doth but reade the Scriptures shall finde that this is not the ordinary language of Christ and his Apostles it was very seldome and very solemne and he that doth but compare this with the practice of quakers shall see a vast difference for it is their common practice and such words are as familiar as any they use as thou art damned and I see the Devill in thy face nay they are their usuall first salute to all they meet withall Was this the Apostles way take but any of their Books and compare them with any of Pauls Epistles and as thou wilt see a spirit of sweetnesse and meeknesse in his so thou wilt observe such a continuall froathing out of passion and bitternes in these men as will lay them naked to be acted by a spirit vastly different from that of Paul or any of the Apostles of the Lord Iesus 4. But shall the holy zeale of Christ and his Apostles be wrested to be made a patronage to their malitious raylings Doe they not by this means labour to take away the sinfulnesse of that rayling which the Apostle tells you is the fruit of the flesh and of which they that are guilty shall never enter into the Kingdome of God 1 Cor. 6.9 But we referr thee for further information in this to the Perfect Pharisee pag 44. 45. Pract. 3. Their pretending upon all occasions to be sent by sheâ—iall Commission from God 1. Here we having related by severall passages of the quakers pretending to a Commission from God the ridiculousnesse of their Messages and that pretence he plainely tells us he will not justifie them and when he cannot shuffle it off he tell us he can say nothing to it because he knows not the things in particular though the persons Reader thou mayst observe that are there mentioned are of his familiar company and converse and so thou wilt easily think had they been lyes we should have heard from him with open mouth yet the man will needs take the boldnesse to call them lyes though he confesse he knows not the particulars Now Reader judge of Nayler and his conscience 2. He sayes that they who were before the Magistrates were invited to any of our houses is false Oh! the confidence of this man and how boldly dare he rush upon a lye or any thing to make us odious All we say is that some of them that came to Newcastle were invited to come to our houses by some of us If Iames Nayler will aske M. Tayler if he were not invited by W. C. to his house when he was at that time at Newcastle and did not come he will see the debauchednesse of his conscience for W. C. doth beleeve M. Tayler hath so much honesty left as not to deny it Quakers justifie their cursing because such vvords are in Scripture and make the Scripture a vvarrant for cursing As to George Foxes cursing M. Fetherston which we quoted p. 48. Perf. Phar. all that Nayler replyes is that M. Fetherston confessed all that Geo. Fox spoke was Scripture What a ridiculous evasion is this of so great a sin Because there are such words in Scripture therefore he may apply them as he will There are these words in Scripture I am the Lord and change not he sits upon the circle of the Heavens c. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God these expressions because they are in Scripture is it therefore lawfull to give them to any creature Nay dare Geo. Fox challenge them to himself because they are in Scripture Or because such words the Lord smite thee thou painted wall thou hast lyed against the holy Ghost for whom is reserved the blacknesse of darknesse for ever Are these true of G. Fox or may we therefore lawfully apply them to G. Fox because they are such words as are found in Scripture Oh! what a ridiculous evasion is this He may also plead that he and his followers may lawfully swear because the words sweare and oaths are to be found in Scripture and then this generation will perfectly come up to the necessary and experienced fruit of these principles viz. Ranting to a great degree wherof they are already attained in their most impudent obscene and shamelesse
nakednesse The next exception is against our objecting Perf. Phar. p. 48. Christopher Atkinson his immodest familiarity with a woman of that way c. where Atkinson challengeth the proofe of it we shall onely say that that immodest familiarity if he will needs force us from our modest covering of that carriage to speak out it was his familiar Kissing of her as we are fully informed by the testimony of M. Walker and M. Wallas and we cannot but account it as a sinfull behaviour But to weaken the strength of this testimony Atkinson tells the Reader that M. Wallace said It was no murther in him to murther Christopher Atkinson and the rest of the prisoners at Kendale Truely we are afraid this whole generation of men are in a confederacy of lying we have purposely sent to finde out the truth of this foule challenge and shall give thee his clearing of himselfe word for word as we received it M. Wallace his vindication from Atkinsons lye HAving received a Paper from the Quakers that were prisoners containing horrible blasphemies viz. That they were the searchers of hearts and saying Let them be accursed from God for ever that will have Christ have any other Body but his Church I spoke these words and no more in the hearing of many viz. That I thought it was no murder in the civill Magistrate to put such blasphemers as they were to death it being according to the Law of God Reade Lev 24.10.16 Deut. 13. the vvhole chapter But that I ever said It was no murder in me to murder them or to put them to death I declare it to be a manifest lye Kendale Ian. 14. 1653. Iohn Wallace We whose names are subscribed did heare when M. Wallace spoke these words above written namely these which are inclosed within the parenthesis but no more Thomas Barket Miles Harrison Now let the Reader judge of what spirit these men are and as for the rayling which Atkinson powres out by reason of this testimony like a floud upon W. C. we his Brethren sâ—y we hope he hath learned that of Christ 2 Pet. 2.23 who when he was reviled reviled not againe when he suffered he threatned not but committed himselfe to him that judgeth righteously There is but one thing remains And that is the account we gave why we called our Booke the Perfect Pharisce which thou mayst reade in pages 49. 50. 51. and so conclude We therein prove from Scripture that that Title was most truely and properly applicable to them to which Nayler answers so exceeding weakely and raylingly that we are resolved not to reply one word thereto as having said enough before to that purpose to discover how weakely he struggles to evade the clearenesse of these Scriptures against himselfe and that way Reader thou wilt by this time see the falsenesse of what Nayler speaks in his word of conclusion to us five as if we had uttered many untruths and false reports taken up by heare say without any ground at all and divers things out of Books which we have on purpose wrested to slander with c. Thou wilt in this reply see the fullest evidence we thinke that can be given as to such cases and all these particulars that he excepts against made the more apparant unto all We professe before the Lord that it 〈◊〉 nothing we have against their persons that should any way leade us to wrest any of their writings to make them odious it is our onely zeale for the truth and Saints of the high God that hath carried out our spirits thus to expose our selves to the revilings of all this generation if by any meanes we might be serviceable to the Gospel and save our selves and them that heare us Thou wilt finde in the close of Naylers Booke two leaves put forth in the name of one who sayes his name in the Flesh is Iohn Andland t is such a perfect piece of bitternesse and rayling and no way in answer to our Booke that we leave it for waste Paper Thus having been carried on by the Everlasting Arme and drawne out by the cords of Love to our deare Lord Iesus his Ordinances and his Saints to beare witnesse to the true grace of God wherein we stand we shall sit downe in comfort and fly to him who is a refuge from the storme and a shadow from the beat when the blaâ—â—â—â— the terrible ones shall be as the storme against the Wall FINIS