38. 1st Treat viz. Whether there be any such thing as Vehiculum Dei or Spiritual Body of Christ which is a Notion several learned Men both before and since the appearance of Quakerism have entertain'd upon the reading the 6th Chapter of St. John I have neither Cause nor Mind at present to dispute p. 38. 1st Treat And to the same purpose he writes more fully and ingeniously in his second Treatise p. 17. Which therefore I may here recite in his own words viz. And here in the first place I shall be so free and ingenuous as to declare that I shall not stand with them concerning any of the Five first Propositions which may be all true for ought I know to the contrary Particularly I shall not stand with them concerning the Spiritual Body of Christ as distinct from that Natural Body wherein he was incarnate of the Virgin Mary There may be such a thing for ought I know or am able to shew to the contrary and I know that several among the Ancients have been of this opinion alledging for its foundation the sixth Chapter of St. John which to confess the truth seems to favour it not a little And this Hypothesis has been of late to the great surprise and amusement of the stiffer and severer sort of Divines re-advanced by a person of singular Note and Eminence in our Church who makes use of it to salve and maintain the Doctrin of the Real Presence supposing that while the Bodies of the Communicants feed upon the grosser Elements of Bread and Wine their Souls as many of them as are fitly disposed do take in and feed upon this Divine and Spiritual Body of Christ which strengthens and nourishes their Inner Man and becomes to them a Principle of Regeneration and Spiritual Life as you may see more fully deduced in his Discourse of the Real Presence particularly in the first and sixth Chapters of that Treatise I shall not therefore I say contend with them concerning the Spiritual Body of Christ either as to its Existence or as to this its Use whether there be such thing or whether it be the Principle of Regeneration and Spiritual Life to the Saints They may be both true for ought I know I see nothing absurd or so much as improbable in them and as I do not surrender up my full assent to what I cannot demonstrate to be true so neither do I care to run down and condemn such Principles which I cannot prove to be false Thus far J. N. It may not be amiss here to insert those 5 first Propositions before mentioned which he has supposed from our friend R. B. c. and which he declared he shall not stand with us concerning any of them for that they may be all true for ought he knows to the contrary Prop. 1. p. 14 15. They meaning the Quakers suppose that the Spiritual Life or the Life of Holiness and Grace is a Substantial Life even as the Life of Vegetation the Life of Sensation and the Life of Reason are all substantial 2. They suppose that this Substantial Life is by the Vital Union of the Soul with some body or other 3. They suppose that this Body in the Vital Union of the Soul with which Spiritual Life does consist is a certain Divine or Celestial Body even as the Natural Life does consist in the Vital Union of the Soul with a Natural or Terrestrial Body of the common Elementary Consistence 4. They suppose that Christ had two Bodies of a distinct Original and of a different Contexture c. a Body which he took from the Virgin Mary and a Body in which his Soul existed long before he took flesh of the Virgin These are the very words of Mr. Barclay To the Question of his adversary Had Christ two Bodies He answers Yes and let him deny it if he dare without contradicting the Scripture Joh. 6. 58. Christ speaks of his flesh which came down from Heaven but this was not the Flesh he took from the Virgin Mary for that came not down from Heaven but he had a Spiritual Body in which his Soul existed long before he took Flesh of the Virgin 5. They suppose that this latter the Spiritual Body of Christ is that Divine or Celestial Body in the Vital Union of the Soul with which our Spiritual Life or our Life of Grace does consist c. That this is that heavenly Manna that living Bread discoursed of in the 6th of St. John that Divine Aliment upon which the Saints do feed and whereby they are nourished unto Everlasting Life Obj. The premises of the whole foregoing matters seriously considered and compared where 's the great difference between J. N. and R. B. 1. The one confesseth the Divine Substantial Essence and Nature of the Deity to be that Light which is in Men. The other confesseth God as Father Son and Spirit to be the Light in Men and to be in that Seed Principle or Spiritual Body of Christ which is in some degree in all Men. 2. The one confesseth the Divine Light of the Word that was with God to be in all Men. The other confesseth Christ who is that Word to be in all Men in some measure 3. The one confesseth the Spiritual Body of Christ consequently Christ's being in that Body The other cannot deny it but rather assents to it 4. Both confess the Light of Christ within to be a Divine Substantial Light and Truth 5. They differ not about the Divine Essence of the Light as being of the Nature and Being of God and Christ as he is the Divine Word or Logos but somewhat about the mode or manner of its Being Discovery and Reception as in Man The one supposeth the very Essence and Substance of the Deity to be intimately united to our Minds And the other that 't is in us as in a Medium i. e. in the Spiritual Body of Christ which is rather assented unto than opposed or in and through Christ as Mediator for therein he is God's Servant most eminent and our Saviour See Isai. 42. 1 6 7. ch 49. 6. ch 52. 13. 53. 11. Zech. 3. 8. 6. But the main difference is That J. N. dislikes and condemns is in R. B. and G. K. their making the Spiritual Body of Christ to be the Light within p. 18. Treat 2d Concerning which and his saying That not even the Soul of Jesus Christ much less his Spiritual Body can ever be a Light to the Mind of Man p. 23. Treat 2d I ask him if any spiritual part of Jesus Christ wherein he is received and knowable in Man can be truly said to be no Light to the Mind or Soul of Man How then says Christ himself I am the Light of the World I am the Way the Truth and the Life No man cometh unto the Father but by me Joh. 14. I could draw strange consequences on J. N. in this matter but chuse at present to be sparing To
evil that with one consent they reject this Light for saith he it checks the Wisest of them all and the Learnedst of them all in secret it reproves them neither can all their Logick silence it nor can the securest among them stop its voice from crying and reproving them within for all their consilence in the outward knowledge of Christ or of what he hath suffered outwardly for them for as hath been often said in a day it strives with all wrestles with all and it 's the unmortified Nature in the Wisest in the Learnedest c. that denies this that despises it that shuts it out to their own condemnation they come all under this description Every one that doth Evil hateth the Light neither cometh to the Light lest his deeds should be reproved Joh. 3. 20. Apology f. 355. Thus far R. Barclay with much more of this kind in his Works which I forbear farther to recite here being I think sufficient to evince to any rational and intelligent person that he did not nor do any of us confine the Light of Christ within in reference to the Act of Illumination or Enlightening to certain Men or to ourselves only but the knowledge and experience of its more powerful operation unto salvation and deliverance of Man from Sin and Satan is only effectually receiv'd and experienc'd in them who return inward unto and obey this Divine Light of Christ within when it unavoidably convicts and reproves them of Sin and Transgression Christ being the Author of Eternal Salvation to them that obey him tho' he actually enlightens all he saves only them that believe and obey him And that R. Barclay did not believe this Divine and Saving-Light to be a Creature as is inferred upon him and the Quakers for his sake pray observe his own Testimony Apology fol. 798. viz. That the Quakers exhort People to believe in a meer Creature is a meer Calumny saith R. B. But now what ground has J. N. to charge the Quakers with confining the Light within as to the Act of Illumination as aforesaid For I find no real cause he has thus to charge us from R. B. his speaking of the natural condition of Man as fallen degenerate dead and deprived of the sensation or feeling of this inward Testimony of the Seed of God and as subject to the power nature and seed of the Serpent and that Man as he is in this state can know nothing a right and that his thoughts and conceptions concerning God and things spiritual are unprofitable to himself and others until he be dis-joined from this Evil Seed and united to the Divine Light P. 8. Apol. fol. 310. And that this holy substantial Seed many times lyes in Man's Heart as a naked Grain in stony Ground Apol. fol. 334. Observe Whence it does not follow That wicked Men who have the Light really and truly in them yet are not actually enlighten'd by it nor yet that it lyes dormant in them as is inferred p. 83. For tho' natural degenerate Man dead in sins and wicked hard-hearted Men have not the true sense and knowledge of the Divine Light it self it follows not that they are not at all or in any sense actually enlightened by it for when they are at any time convicted and reproved of evil judged and condemned in themselves for their wickedness and evil deeds and excited to the contrary they are thereby so far actually enlightened tho' they know not that Light it self nor what it is that doth so convict reprove and condemn them the Spirit of Truth reproves the World of Sin c. yet they neither accept nor see it as they ought to do and the Spirit many times blows or breaths upon them yet they know not whence it comes nor whither it goes nor really what it is tho' it does actually visit and enlighten them the Sun shines and the Rain falls actually upon the stony and barren Ground so the Lord causeth his Sun actually to arise upon the evil and the good and the Rain to fall upon the just and unjust And some grow past feeling and become judicially harden'd through their rebellion and presumptuous sinning against the Light How often is the Candle of the wicked put out how oft is destruction upon him 'T is therefore often lighted Concerning what J. N. is pleased to impute to the Quakers in general viz. That they do not hold their Light to be the very Substance and Essence of the Deity p. 39. Herein he is mistaken of the People call'd Quakers who profess God to be our Light and Salvation And I think his particular Instance from Robert Barclay impartially considered and compared with other Instances of his will fall so far short of proving the Charge upon the Quakers that the contrary will appear for him and the Quakers in this case His Instance for proof is viz. That Mr. Barclay saith By this Seed Grace and Word of God and Light wherewith we say every Man is enlightened and hath a measure of it which strives with them in order to save them and which may by the stubbornness and wickedness of Man's will be quenched bruised wounded pressed down slain and crucified We understand not the proper Essence and Nature of God precisely taken but a spiritual heavenly and invisible Principle in which God as Father Son and Holy Ghost dwells a measure of which divine and glorious life is in all Men as a Seed c. and this we call Vehiculum Dei or the Spiritual Body of Christ the Flesh and Blood of Christ which came down from Heaven p. 37 38. On which J. N. observes thus viz. I think 't is plain from this account Mr. Barclay gives of the Light that tho' it be a Substance yet 't is not the same with but really distinct from the substance of God for 't is not Deus but Vehiculum Dei Thus far J. N. Ans. 1. By the way being sensible where the stress of his Objection lyes and what Words it most here pinches upon I do sincerely propose That the Divine Light 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word of God cannot be confined to those or any such Explications here objected in a strict or literal sense neither shall I insist upon the same If J. N. should write another Book or more thereof I shall not contest with him about varieties of Words and Terms which he may have and know far more of than I but for Things and Substance knowing that the Light is very comprehensive and large in its extent and signification 'T is said that God is Light and Christ is the Light and the Law is Light and the Commandment a Lamp and the Word both a Light and Lanthorn By which manner of speaking it may then be said the Word is both the Light and its own Vehicle And then why may not Christ's Spiritual Body which came down from Heaven as well be a Light as Life Aliment or Food to the Soul or as
conclude this Comparison for reconcilement Although R. B. and J. N. acknowledge Christ the Divine Word or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the Light within even that Light which enlightens all Men the one supposeth 't is as in the spiritual Body of Christ and the other cannot tell he knows not but there may be such a thing However both confess the Light to be a substantial Light of the Divine Essence and Nature of the Deity I think in the main the difference is not very great not so great as to deserve such severe Reflections and Reproach from J. Norris As That the Notion of the Light within according as the Quakers explain and represent it is really ridiculous enough to make the Patrons of it so and well deserves all the scorn and contempt that is cast upon it p. 3 4. Treat 2. But I must take leave to tell him I cannot believe this his Reproach and Contempt which he hath cast on us and our Notion as he calls it nor that it can any ways become his Profession either thus to gratifie Scorners and Contemners or thus to teach the wicked their way who scorn and contemn Religion and Truth but rather I take it that he writ this scornful and contemning Passage against us very inconsiderately and from a groundless Passion of which the Lord make him truly sensible and forgive him And also of his undue censorious and scurrilous detraction viz. That the Quakers only Cant in some loose and general Expression about the Light which they confirm with the Authority of St. John ' s Gospel tho' they understand neither one nor t'other p. 24. Herein he was too censorious we know in whom we have believed we thank God and what inward sense and experience we have of his Light and Grace in our Hearts for Life and Salvation from Sin and Death and what real change and reformation it has wrought and brought forth in us in Life and Conversation◠Blessed be the Lord our God for ever Yea we can sincerely say Glory be to the Father Son and Holy Ghost And seeing J. N. saith That to the like purpose Mr. Keith another of their most considerable Writers speaking of the Seed of God saith c. By his words to the like purpose he means like as R. B. hath declared about the Spiritual Body of Christ c. To which I say then what has been said for R. B. in the case may serve for Answer to him about G. K. Howbeit that Faithful Man R. B. being gone to his rest and not here to answer for himself I was the more concerned to take notice of him and of his own Explications in this Matter It may be R. Vickeris or some else may find cause to answer J. N.'s two Treatises more particularly and fully for themselves but that I leave What J. N. saith That to be a Light to the Mind of Man is to be to it the Principle of Understanding to furnish it with Idea's and to be the immediate Object of its Conception immediately present to the Mind and to have the whole perfection of being the Idea's of all things and to be an Universal Representative which conditions especially the last no creature either has or can possibly have and therefore no creature is able to be a Light to the Soul of Man p. 23. Treat 2. These Propositions we shall not need to dispute nor oppose the Inference which affects not our Principle of the Divine and increated Light of God and Christ in Man and therefore shall not need to examine J. N.'s large Philosophical Demonstrations of the same Propositions being not denied but the same in effect asserted by R. B. In his concluding it A meer Calumny for any one to say That the Quakers Exhort People to believe in a meer Creature Apol. 798. Besides where such Creatures as the Saints in Christ were called the Light of the World and the Salt of the Earth and those that were sometimes Darkness were become Light in the Lord when converted they were such not of themselves nor as meer Creatures but as joined and united unto and made partakers of Christ Jesus and to God in him who was their Light their Life and Salvation and that heavelily Salt that seasoned and sanctified them And if they were Light in the Lord who was their Light much more Christ Jesus who is the Fountain of Divine Light and Universal Illumination in whose Light and not as in a Creature Men ought to believe that they may be Children of the Light And although we believe in God through Jesus Christ and 't is through him as our Mediator that our Faith is truly in God and not without respect to Christ and living Faith in him he being the Author of our Living and Divine Faith who said Ye believe in God believe also in me Joh. 14. 1. 'T is evident that accordingly R. B. testifies unto Jesus Christ the Son of God both as God and Man Creator and Mediator saying Apol. p. 274 275. 1. That Word that was in the Beginning with God and was God by whom all things were made c. and that this is that Jesus Christ by whom God created all things by whom and for whom all things were created that are in Heaven and Earth c. Col. 1. 16. Who therefore is called the First-born of every Creature Col. 1. 15. As then that infinite and incomprehensible Fountain of Life and Motion appeareth in the Creatures by his own Eternal Word and Power 2. So no Creature has access again unto him but in and by the Son according to his own express words See Matt. 11. 27. Luke 10. 22. Joh. 14. 6. Hence he is fitly called the Mediator betwixt God and Man c. And that there is no knowledge of the Father but by the Son and that he is the only Mediator p. 368. POSTSCRIPT Friend John Norris ON the serious perusal of the Controversie 1. I do not find that thou hast exalted the Divine Light of God and his dear Son more than the People called Quakers yet am glad thou hast exalted it so much as thou hast done beyond many if not most of thy Brethren and I truly wish thy mind may be turned into it and kept in it out of all fleshly Wisdom and Imaginations that thou mayest feel true Divine Life Power and Wisdom in it as well as have a Notion of it 2. I do not see but our Friends exalt Jesus Christ as Mediator betwixt God and Men more than thy self For which please to consider 1. Thy supposing the very Essence and Substance of the Deity to be so intimately united to our Minds as that there can be no Medium between God and the Creature p. 22. Treat 1. p. 8. Treat 2. 2. Thy supposing the Light within to be a Man's natural and ordinary way of Vnderstanding and saying This is Reason this is Conscience speaking of the Light p. 22. 55. Tr. 1. This I