Soul whereby she is formally taught and instructed Now are these Two the same If they are so are a Square and a Circle Mr. Vickris and my Self Quakerism and Primitive Christianity But he demands of me where I learnt this Account of the Quakers Faith and Doctrin of the Light within viz. That they represent its direction by a determinate form'd Dictate or Proposition I answer from one that may be presumed to have dived into the bottom of Quakerism and to have comprehended the whole Mystery of it as well as any Man of that Profession and that is Mr. Barclay who speaking of that Letter of our Master that is writ in our Hearts says Our Master is always with us and he requires us to do all our Works by his immediate Counsel Direction c. And again to the same effect speaking of the Jews rejecting Christ notwithstanding that they had the Scriptures he resolves it into this because they hearkned not unto the inward Voice and Testimony of the Father concerning him Again he speaks of a Word in the Heart and of the inward Testimony of the Spirit Again He writes them a living Copy in their Hearts Again he talks of immediate Teaching of the Spirit and of Preaching that comes immediately from the Spirit He says further that this saving Spiritual Light is the Gospel Preach'd in every Creature under Heaven And that tho the outward Declaration of the Gospel be taken sometimes for the Gospel yet it is but figuratively and by a Metonymy For to speak properly says he the Gospel is this inward Power and Life which Preaches glad Tidings in the Hearts of all Men c. More expresly yet Mr. Barclay calls the Revelation of the Light the Voice of God inwardly speaking to the Mind of Man and in this he makes the very form of Revelation to consist And Mr. Keith makes the Divine Light to be all one with the Divine Voice and Call and to this he applies that of the Twenty Ninth Psalm The Voice of the Lord is a Glorious Voice And to this purpose 't is usual with them to apply that of the Prophet Habakkuk I will stand upon my Watch and set me upon the Tower and will watch to see what he will say unto me Hab. 2. 1. And that of the Psalmist I will hear what God the Lord will Speak Psal 85. 8. All which Passages do plainly enough imply that they represent the Direction of the Light after the manner of a determinate form'd Dictate or Proposition formally and expresly tutouring and instructing them And Mr. Vickris himself acknowledges as much in the Words immediately following his Question when he says that the Quakers believe the Light of Christ within to be God's Divine Oracle of Wisdom in the Soul the Former Dictator and Determiner of Heavenly Propositions them directing and instructing what to choose and what to refuse Which how it differs from my Account that they make it a determinate form'd Dictate or Proposition expresly directing and instructing them to do so or so I confess my Eye-sight too weak to distinguish But if Mr. Vickris be as good at finding out Differences as he is at finding out Likenesses perhaps he may be able to distinguish them As to what he says concerning the Light 's not always actually operating upon the Understanding because the Organ of Perception may be sometimes indisposed he does not therein at all contradict me who tho I make the Light to be common to all Men even as to the act of Illumination in some degree or other enough to render and denominate them Rational Creatures yet am far enough from supposing with Descartes that the Soul does at all times actually think His Principle indeed obliges him so to suppose because he makes actual Cogitation to be of the very Essence of the Soul as much as Extension is of the Essence of Matter But my Principle does not any way oblige me to the like supposition nor do I suppose that the Soul is in every instant actually inllghten'd or in other words that she does always actually think 'T is plain she does not as in the case of Infants in the Womb and of Maturer Persons when in a deep Sleep Herein therefore Mr. Vickris does not at all contradict me who agree with him as to this Point that the Soul is not always in actual Illumination But tho in this he does not contradict me yet he very foully and grosly contradicts himself in making at the same time the Presence of the Light to the Understanding to imply its Operation upon it when according to his Principles he must acknowledge the Light to be ever present with the Soul And if always present then according to him it must always operate since the Presence implies the Operation wherein he plainly contradicts himself As he does again afterwards when he taxes me of Contradiction and Inconsistency in supposing the Light always present to my Understanding and intimately united with it and yet that it does not formally enlighten it but when attended to and consulted This he says discovers a Contradiction in it self and to the formal reason of its Being and Presence and Sufficiency in the one act of the same Principle as well as to the state and nature of Intimate Union For how can any thing says he be intimately united to its Principle and not partake of its Nature and Influences which is the reason and manner of its Union In all which he still proceeds upon his former Supposition that the Presence and Union of the Divine Light with the Soul does necessarily imply and infer its operation upon it And since upon the Principles of Quakerism 't is acknowledg'd and by Mr. Vickris himself in this very exception openly confess'd that the Light is always present for says he expresly that this Divine Light is always in some degree and measure present in the Soul the Quakers believe this plainly contradicts what he had laid down before that the Light does not always operate upon the Understanding and that to say that it does is more than can safely be said Why more than can safely be said if the Divine Light be always present to the Soul and if the Presence of the Light does necessarily infer its actual Operation I may ask here of him in his own Words Is not this manifest Confusion Nay is it not withal manifest Contradiction and downright Inconsistency If not I will never pretend to judge of a Contradiction again As to the Contradiction he would sain fasten upon me because I suppose the Light always present and yet not actually to inlighten but when attended 't is evident that it is of no force unless I had held the same Principle with him that the bare Presence of the Light does infer its actual Operation on the Soul and then indeed I had been guilty of Contradiction as he plainly is But I do not acknowledge the truth of that
And so long as I make all Men in some measure to consult it tho I do withal say that they are enlightned by it only when they consult it I do not thereby deny that all are actually enenlightned by it For this does not deny the Universality of Actual Illumination but only determins and specifies the way and manner of it So that here is no Contradiction but all things are Uniform and Confistent Exception against the Fifth Article THE Fifth I take in the First Part of it to be the same in Substance with thy First differing in Form of Expressions viz. The Quakers by their Light within understand some Determinate Formed Dictate or Proposition expresly or positively directing or instructing them to do so or so as in thy first thou calledst it some Divine Communication or Manifestation only Where didst thou learn this Definition of the Quakers Faith and Doctrin of the Light within The Quakers believe the Light of Christ within to be God's Divine Oracle of Wisdom in the Soul the Former Dictator and Determiner of Heavenly Propositions them directing and instructing what to chuse and what to refuse as the Original Cause of the Knowledg and Love of Truth which are its proper Effects Now wherein is the Quakers Light as thou term'st it inferiour to that of thine except in the differing Character thou givest it They own the Real and Substantial Truth of God the Life of the Word the Light of Men as Christ said of himself I am the Way the Truth and the Life That this Divine Light which is the Light of Men is always in some Degree and Measure present in the Soul by which it is upheld either in God's Love or Anger the Quakers believe and that in him we live move and have our Being tho with respect to Operation after a different manner and measure and passing the Understanding of Man And whereas thou say'st Thy Light is only the Essential Truth of God This is an high Presumption about which I have already shew'd thy Confusion in other places calling it Reason and Conscience and a Man's Natural and Ordinary way of Understanding Consider Mat. 6. 22 23. The Light of the Body c. If therefore the Light that is in thee be Darkness c. So may I say if that Doctrin and Principle thou recommendest to the World for Truth and Excellency be erroneous and faulty how great is that Error and Fault Again thou say'st Thy Light is always present to thy Understanding and intimately united with it still Sect. 5. which in thy Sense of the Light is to say thy Soul is never without thy Reason and Conscience I wish they were both reform'd that thou may'st be no more guilty of these and such like false Aspersions That the Light supposing it to be what really it is a distinct Principle from the Soul is always present to the Undestanding which implies its Operation upon the Natural Capacity or Organ the ordinary means of knowing I conceive is more than can be safely or experimentally said because the Organ may be hurt and the Understanding in that Sense interrupted and consequently no fit Medium or Receptacle either for the Soul or its Light Besides the Soul may be absent from the Natural Understanding by the Interposition of Spiritual as well as Natural Causes and yet present with the Light in its Spiritual way of Understanding But to say as thou dost that Thy Light is only the Essential Truth of God and that it is always present to thy Understanding and intimately united with it and yet that it does not formally enlighten or instruct it but when carefully attended to and consulted seems to discover a Contradiction in its self and to the Formal Reason of its Being and Presence and Sufficiency in the one Act of the same Principle as well as to the State and Nature of Intimate Union For how can any thing be intimately united to its Principle and not partake of its Nature and Influences which is the Reason and Manner of its Union And how can this be and not carefully attended to and consulted Is not this manifest Confusion That the Presence of the Light does enlighten and instruct all in some Sense and Degree is sufficiently proved by Scripture By thy Word Formally Enlighten I apprehend thou intendest the Operative Exercise as in Pag. 17. and as here applied to Light signifies no more than actually to enlighten ex parte Objecti I grant such as do not carefully attend to and consult this Divine Light do not witness the Increases of it unto the Redemption and Salvation of their Souls It is the Path of the Just that is as the shining Light that shineth more and more unto the perfect Day If the Light as thou assertest doth not formally enlighten or instruct but when carefully attended to and consulted how then should it quicken and raise the Soul from Death to Life according to the multiplied experience of Holy David And how doth God speak once yea twice yet Man perceiveth it not Job 33. 14 15 16 17. and Isa 65. How frequently doth the Lord complain by his Prophets of his calling to his People to return and repent but they would not answer Note the Call of God is not without Instruction read Mic. 6. 8 and Prov. 1 from 20 to the end And see what Wisdom does also in Nehemiah how they rebelled against God notwithstanding he gave his good Spirit to instruct them The Testimony of John the Evangelist the 5th and 21th Ephes 2. 1 4 5. 2 Cor. 4. 6 7. These and many other Texts abundantly prove that God quickens and enlightens Man before Man can turn unto him The Answer I Have given my self the trouble to set down this Exception at large not because I intend to answer it all but that it may appear to the Discerning Reader that there is a great deal of it which I need not answer as being either answer'd already or so very impertinent and remote from the business that it deserves no consideration But in the first place I cannot but admire at the singular Happiness of his Fancy in imagining the former part of the Fifth Article to be the same in substance with the First and to differ only in form of Expression In the First it is said that the Quakers usually talk of the Light within as of some Divine Communication or Manifestation only that is as it has been explain'd that they represent their Light not as God himself but only as a divine Communication or as something communicated or exhibited by God In the Fifth it is said That the Quakers by their Light within that is as Directive understand some determinate formed Dictate or Proposition expresly and positively directing and instructing them to do so or so That is that they make the Direction of the Light or the Light as Directive to consist in Dictates or Propositions ready form'd and presented to the view of the
Mind or the Purity of my Intention or the Cleanness of my Vessel Either this is very impertinently or very uncharitably suggested Either he means nothing by it or he means ill And that he does so he has taken Care to satisfie the Reader by explaining himself more fully in the very next Words For whoso says he undertakes to reprehend the Intelligible Conduct of Human Life ought first to purge himself from the Irregularities of his Moral Conduct which does Cloud and darken his Understanding What a scurvy malicious Insinuation is this For tho the Words abstractly consider'd be a Proposition of Universal Truth and may bear an innocent and inoffensive Sense yet consider'd with their Occasion and with their Application to me if they signifie any thing they must signifie ill there must be either an intolerable Impertinence in them or a great deal of Malice and Censoriousness For does he not by this plainly insinuate to the World that I am an ill Man and that there are such Irregularities in my Moral Conduct as make me unfit to reflect upon the Intellectual Conduct of Human Life And would not any one that knew nothing of me any otherwise than by this Paper of his and were to take his Measure of me from hence be tempted to conclude that I was a Man of a loose and debauch'd Conversation Now if I deserve this Character I have nothing to complain of but if I do not and I appeal even to Mr. Vickris himself nay even to the World whether I do or no then this is a very uncharitable and very unchristian Insinuation And yet as bad as it is he has more of the same and that notwithstanding what he says of himself in the Paragraph immediately following that he is far from a Spirit of Detraction Which Passage I think should either have been left out or set at a greater distance from the foregoing one wherein there seems to be so strong a Savour of that Spirit As there does in what follows when p. 4. He charges me with despising the Testimony of God through the Meanness of the Instruments Applying to me that of the Apostle to the Thessalonians chap. 4. v. 8. He therefore that despiseth despiseth not Man but God who hath also given unto us his Holy Spirit Which Allegation I shall allow to be pertinent when he has proved those Instruments he talks of to be equally inspired with the Apostles But till then he must give me leave to think and call it a Blasphemous piece of Arrogance For it can be no less to make Despising the Quakers the same with despising God unless it be proved that the Quakers are Divinely inspired When I see this done I shall allow of the Expression In the mean while I must beg Mr. Vickris not to be angry if I tell him that it puts me in mind of a Story I have heard of a Quaker in Oxford who when some of the young Scholars for some Rudenesses and Disturbances he had been guilty of in the College had brought him to the Pump to pump him while he was doing his Penance impudently cried out Pump on Pump on you Pump not me but the Lord. I will not say Mr. Vickris his Expression is exactly of a piece with this but there is so much Resemblance between them that assoon as I read one I could not chuse but think of t'other But he goes on in his Censorious and Uncharitable Reflections for after he had quoted Page 6. that Passage out of the Book of Wisdom chap. 1. v. 4. Into a malicious Soul Wisdom will not enter nor dwell in the Body that is subject to Sin For the Holy Spirit of Discipline will fly Deceit and remove from Thoughts that are without Understanding and will not abide when Unrighteousness cometh in For Wisdom is a loving Spirit and will not acquit a Blasphemer of his Words for God is the Witness of his Reins and a true Beholder of his Heart and an Hearer of his Tongue Therefore he that speaketh unrighteous things can't be hid neither shall Vengeance when it punishes pass by him All which in the abundance of his Civility and Charity he has thought fit to apply to me He proceeds to add Now seeing these Sayings are true and righteous and that 't is possible to profess this Doctrin of the Divine Word Light Grace Spirit of Wisdom and Truth and the teachings of it and yet not possess it nor be learn'd of it nor led by it but whilst preaching of it to others to be a Cast-a-way I advise thee to consider in what Ground and Nature thou yet standest and livest in and what Spirit lives and rules in thee I thank him for his Advice but not for that spiteful and strangely censorious Insinuation that goes along with it which amounts to no less than that I am one of those malicious Souls into which Wisdom will not enter that I am deceitful without Understanding unrighteous and a Blasphemer That tho I profess the Doctrin of the Divine Light yet I do not possess it nor am led by it but while I preach it to others am my self a Cast-away which I think is as bad as one Man can well say of another and yet 't is what he plainly insinuates if there be any Connection or Pertinence in what he says But fearing he had not been yet plain enough and lest the too candid Reader should miss his Meaning he proceeds Hath not Unrighteousness entred in through Self-love and Esteem which blinds the Eye and causes the Tongue to speak Unrighteous things Here he charges me with Unrighteousness Ambition and Self-love which last he is pleased to beighten to such an extravagant pitch as to make me an Idolater and that of the worst sort as making my self to be my God For says he Is not Self exalted to sit in the Temple of God as God in thee What a Flight of Censoriousness and Uncharity is this For besides the Heinousness of the Charge it being as bad as can be said of the Devil himself that he makes Self his God there being nothing so opposite to Charity which refers all to God as Self-love which refers all to its self I say besides the Heinousness of the Charge 't is also of such a particular Nature as were I indeed guilty of it it would be impossible for any Man much more for Mr. Vickris who is a meer Stranger to me without a Divine Revelation ever to know For Self-love is a Vice of the Heart and one of the most latent and retired of all the Vices that are lodged there and consequently obnoxious to his Judgment only who is a Discerner of the Heart to whom all Hearts be open all Desires known and from whom no Secret is hid God alone can tell how far Self is exalted either in me or in any Man else And therefore Mr. Vickris had much better have left me to His Judgment than to sit in Judgment upon me himself and
see if he review the place with the least Attention the Opposition between my Notion of the Divine Light and that of the Quakers is not made to consist in this that they make it to be an Accident and I a Substance but in this that they represent it as something only communicated exhibited or manifested by God whether as an Accident or a Substance I was not then concerned to consider whereas in my Account it is the very Essence and Substance of the Deity exhibitive of all Truth and always presential to our Mind And therefore when 't is said that the Quakers usually talk of the Light within as of some Divine Communication or Manifestation only the Term only is not exclusive of Substance in general but of the Divine Substance or Essence of God I know very well and have no temptation to dissemble it that 't is the express Doctrin of the Quakers that the Divine Light is a Substance not an Accident For they make it the Principle of Regeneration which they all say and Mr. Keith has taken a great deal of Pains to prove it is a Substantial Life as much as the Life of Vegetation Sensation or Reason is and as far as I can apprehend the Notion may be sound and true enough in its self and wants only to be fix'd upon a right Bottom And I know that Mr. Barclay in his Apology lately Printed in Folio with the rest of his Works says expresly We understand not this Seed Light or Grace to be an Accident as most Men ignorantly do but a Real Spiritual Substance which the Soul of Man is capable to Feel and Apprehend from which that Real Spiritual Inward Birth in Believers arises call'd the New Creature the New Man in the Heart But tho it be too plain to be denied that the Quakers make the Light to be a real Substance yet 't is also as plain that they do not make it the very Substance of God By this Seed Grace and Word of God and Light says Mr. Barclay wherewith we say every Man is enlightned 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 quench'd bruised wounded pressed down slain and crucified we understand not the proper Essence and Nature of God precisely taken which is not Divisible into Parts and Measures as being a most pure simple Being void of all Composition or Division and therefore can neither be resisted hurt wounded crucified or slain by all the Efforts and Strength of Men. But we understand a Spiritual Heavenly and Invisible Principle in which God as Father Son and Spirit dwells a measure of which Divine and glorious Life is in all men as a Seed which of its own Nature draws invites and inclines to God And this we call Vehiculum Dei or the Spiritual Body of Christ the Flesh and Blood of Christ which came down from Heaven of which all the Saints do feed and are thereby nourish'd unto eternal Life Whether there be any such thing as this 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 But 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 or Essence of God For it is not Deus but Vehiculum Dei And to the like purpose Mr. Keith another of their most considerable Writers speaking of the Seed of God which is the same with the Light now in Question says that it is not the Godhead it self but a certain middle Nature Substance or Being betwixt the Godhead and Mankind c. Again says he p. 131. This middle Nature I call a Divine Substance or Essence not as if it were the Godhead it self or a Particle or Portion of it but because of its excellency above all other things next unto the Godhead as on such an Account Men do call other things Divine which are very excellent c. Again says he in the next Paragraph This excellent and intermediate Being may be call'd the Divine Being because the Godhead is most immediately manifest therein and dwelleth in it as in the most Holy Place or Holy of Holies More Testimonies I might but I think need not add it being sufficiently clear from these cited out of Mr. Barclay and Mr. Keith that the Quakers do not hold their Light to be the very Substance and Essence of the Deity though at the same time I think they ought and that they are inconsistent with themselves in that they do not For that Text of St. John In him was Life and the Life was the Light of Men which they quote to prove the Light to be a Substantial Principle does not prove so much as that unless the Proposition be understood Formally and if it be then it proves a great deal more viz. That 't is not only a Substance which is all they infer from it but also a Divine Substance strictly speaking even the very Essence of the Deity And indeed what less than that can be a Light to the Soul How can any thing that is not God or that is created be so But 't is not my present Business to consider what the Quakers ought to say but what they do say 'T is plain that they do not make the Divine Light to be the proper Substance of God but a certain middle Nature and 't is as plain that I do which lays a sufficient ground of Difference between us so that my first Distinction is so far from falling to the Ground that it stands upon firmer Ground than ever and if my Adversary has but the Understanding and the Ingenuity of a Man I dare appeal to him whether he be not fairly Answer'd and Confuted as far as concerns this first Particular But whatever his Judgment be I presume the Judicious Reader will be of mine and so give me leave to advance forward to the Exception against the Second Article THY Second is as insignificant and like an Arrow shot at random lights on thy own Head being attended with some contradiction to thy former Thou sayest the Quakers represent this Light within as a sort of extraordinary Inspiration Where learn'st thou this Before it was a Divine Communication and Manifestation only and now an extraordinary Inspiration Thou wouldst have done well to have let the Quakers Principle alone till thou hadst learnt it better and more honestly to represent it Is not Extraordinary more than Common or Communication and Manifestation only Have not the Quakers declared the Light to be Universal as well as Divine in its Gift and Manifestation to the Sons of Men It is certainly true they have and yet I
deny not but such who apply their Minds in Obedience to the teachings of this Light and Heavenly Gift may be made Partakers of more viz. Extraordinary Gifts and Graces by the Inspiration of the same Spirit If for this they have the Name of Enthysiasts given them as in this Section of thy Postscript tho it be in Derision they will rejoyce in it for it shall be as an Ornament of Grace to their Head and Chains about their Neck Again in the same Section thou say'st I suppose it viz. The Light within to be a Man's natural and ordinary way of Understanding And just before thou madest it to be the very Essence and Substance of the Deity which are thy own express Words See thy Confusion and Self-contradiction By these Words a Man's Natural and Ordinary Way of Understanding I take thee to intend the same thing as in pag. 77. where thou call'st it Reason and Conscience and yet at the same time call'st it The Divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Region of Truth in which are hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge the great and universal Oracle lodg'd in every Man's Breast whereof the ancient Urim and Thummim was an express Type or Emblem Here thou debasest and confoundest thy Principle making it to be a part of Man's Nature whereas the Principle of Divine Light as held by the Quakers is a distinct thing from Man's Soul Reason or Natural Conscience viz. a more excellent Spirit and Principle And herein I confess is a material Difference betwixt thy Principle of Light and the Quakers as thou hast express'd it Sure I am it is a great Error to render the Divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which all things were made and are upheld to be no higher a Principle than Man's Reason and Conscience or natural and ordinary way of Understanding which Reason is a Property Essential to him as Man I confess to know the things of a Man according to that Scripture 1 Cor. 2. 9 10 14. But as it is written Eye hath not seen nor Ear heard c. By which it manifestly appears that the true Knowledge of God and Spiritual Things are attain'd by the Spirit which is superiour to Man's rational Principle or natural Conscience which may be defiled and corrupted as 't is said expresly of the impure that even their Mind and Conscience is defiled The Answer THIS Second Exception consisting of several things must be severally consider'd First He demands of me where I learnt that the Quakers represent this Light within as a sort of extraordinary Inspiration But before I answer his Question I must settle the Meaning of my own Words which he is pleased to take in a Sense quite different from what I intended and what the scope and occasion of the Article requires When therefore I say that the Quakers represent this Light within as a sort of Extraordinary Inspiration 't is plain from the Antithesis of the Article that my meaning is that they represent it as a Supernatural Gift or Grace meaning by Supernatural not only something beside above or beyond the Nature of Man for so also upon my Principle 't is acknowledged to be Supernatural because I expresly make it to be the very Essence of God but something above or beyond the common Order State or Condition of Human Nature Supernatural not only as to the Substance of it for that 's confess'd on both Hands only more exalted upon my Hypothesis than upon theirs but also as to its Dispensation and Order being such an extraordinary superabundant Addition to the Nature of Man as is not necessary he should always have and without which he would still continue a rational and intelligent Nature In opposition to which I said that 't is a Man's Natural and Ordinary way of Understanding that is that 't is so far from being such an extraordinary Superaddition to Human Nature as Man might be without and yet be a reasonable Creature that 't is so much the Natural and Ordinary way of his Understanding that he could not be able to understand at all without it That he would not only have less Light should it be taken from him but be quite in the Dark In one Word that 't is not a thing of Advantage only but of Necessity necessary to the very Being as well as to the well or better Being of a reasonable understanding Spirit as such who without this Light would not only not see so well but would be able to see nothing or not at all This is the plain obvious Sense of my Words only drawn out more at length whereby it appears that my Notion differs considerably from that of the Quakers in this particular also And now if this be the Sense of my Proposition as 't is plain that 't is it being not capable of any other I may easily answer Mr. Vickris his Question that demands of me Where I learnt that the Quakers represent this Light within as a sort of extraordinary Inspiration For 't is very plain that they make this Internal Light to be Grace that special and peculiar Grace of Christ whereby he restores laps'd Man from the Corruption of his Natural State For this end says Mr. Barclay that is for the Restoration of Man God hath communicated and given unto every man a measure of the Light of his Son a measure of Grace or a measure of the Spirit c. And again he calls it expresly a Supernatural Gift and Grace of Christ Not that I would be thought to deny the Divine Light to be Grace as to certain Degrees of it So far from that that I think it to be the greatest Grace of God that is with respect to the Degrees of it many of which I allow to be such extraordinary Superadditions to the common Order or State of Human Nature as Man might simply be without and yet continue in the Rank and Form of a reasonable and intelligent Creature But not content with this the Quakers make the Divine Light to be Grace simply and absolutely as to its whole Nature and Kind so as to be all over extraordinary And if so then they are so far from making it as I do necessary to a Man's Natural and Ordinary way of Understanding that they must make it such a Superabundant Accession to the common Condition of Man's Nature as without which he would still understand enough to denominate him a Rational Being For certainly a Man may understand without Grace But that my Adversary may not pretend that I lay the whole stress of this matter upon a Consequence tho it be a very plain one I will prove the same by express Testimony namely That the Quakers do make their Light to be according to the before-stated Sense of the Word something extraordinary something added to the common way of Understanding so as not to be simply necessary to Understanding in general but only to the greater Advantage of it For says
not to proceed with such Suspense in this matmatter being so fully assured of my being in the right here as well as in the other parts of my Account that had I the Liberty to New-Cast this Article again it should be in the very same Mould Mr. Vickris indeed tells me that 't is an Abuse to say the Quakers confine the Light within And I tell him again that 't is an abuse in him to say that this is my Charge I never said absolutely and simply that they confine the Light within which would imply a Confinement to Persons but that they confine it to some certain Objects namely Moral and Spiritual Truths in order only to the Direction of Practice And that they do thus confine the Light is as plain and certain as that they hold it if Mr. Barclay may be allow'd to understand their Principles For says he As God gave two great Lights to rule the outward World the Sun and Moon the greater Light to Rule the Day and the lesser Light to rule the Night So hath he given Man the Light of his Son a Spiritual Divine Light to rule him in the things Spiritaal and the Light of Reason to rule him in things Natural Here it is very plain First That he supposes two distinct Lights in the Soul the Divine Light and the Light of Reason or the Natural Light which by the way sufficiently confirms what was said in the last Section concerning their making the Divine Light an Extraordinary Communication that is Superaccessory to the Natural Light or Man's Natural and Ordinary way of Understanding which might remain intire and unextinguisht tho separated from the Divine Light as being a Principle wholly distinct from it and that stands upon another Bottom Contrary to what I contend for namely That there is but one Light in the Soul of Man which is the Divine Light wherein we see and perceive all things and by which we naturally and ordinarily understand 'T is also very plain in the 2d place That as he supposes two distinct Lights in the Soul the Divine and the Natural so he assigns them two distinct Offices no less distinct than Day and Night the Divine Light being to direct in things Spiritual as the Sun rules the Day and the Natural Light being to direct in things Natural as the Moon governs the Night Each it seems has its proper Orb and Province and they can no more interfere with one another's Order than the Sun can usurp the Government of the Night or the Moon assume to her self the Conduct of the Day And if this be not to confine the Divine Light to some certain Objects namely to Moral and Spiritual Truths I know not what is 'T is confined as much to such Objects as the Sun is confined to the Day and I desire no more thinking that to be Confinement eenough If Mr. Vickris had been but half so much confin'd to Civility and Good Behaviour he would have treated me with more Humanity and Courtesie than he has done in some parts of his Book I might be more liberal of Quotations upon this occasion if I thought there were any need but since that already produc'd is so express to the purpose I shall only take notice of a remarkable Passage in the Preface to Mr. Barclay's Works lately Printed in Folio where the Ingenious Author giving an Account of his Apology for the true Christian Divinity makes one himself for the Scholastic manner and way of its Composition which it seems was in Tenderness to Scholars and in Condescension to their Education His Words are The Method and Style of the Book may be somewhat Singular and like a Scholar for we make that sort of Learning no part of our Divine Science c. Where 't is plain that by that sort of Learning he means Human Learning those Arts and Sciences which are the common Objects of our Academical Studies And that by our Divine Science he means that Knowledg which is supernaturally communicated to them by the saving Light of Christ whereof he had discours'd before So that when he says we make that sort of Learning no part of our Divine Science it comes to as much as if he had said We make Human Learning or those Arts and Sciences which are the common Objects of Academical Study to be no part of that Knowledg which is supernaturally communicated to us by the Light of Christ And if Human Learning be no part of that Knowledg which comes by the Divine Light then the Divine Light is not extended to Human Learning and consequently must be confined to Spiritual Truths the very Province which Mr. Barclay had assign'd it before And to this Supposition the Thread of their former Principle naturally leads them For supposing the Divine Light to be an Extraordinary Communication of God that is something superadded to the Natural and Ordinary way of Understanding there is all the reason in the World that they should assign to it Divine and Spiritual Objects as its proper Sphere and Province since Natural things were before sufficiently discernible by a Natural Light and Principle Especially considering that this Divine Light is also conceiv'd and represented by them as that very Grace of Christ whereby Men are Converted and Saved and which was given to them by God for that very purpose For so Mr. Barclay in his 5th and 6th Propositions reckoning up the Ends and Purposes for which the saving and spiritual Light as he calls it was given by God makes them to consist in making manifest all things that are reprovable in teaching all Temperance Righteousness and Godliness and in general in Lightning the Hearts of all in order to Salvation So then it seems this Light is purely in order to Salvation and consequently ought to be confined to the things that concern it that is to Divine and Spiritual Truths in order to the Direction of Life and Manners Herein therefore they are consonant to their Principles As they do thus confine their Light to Spiritual things so they ought thus to confine it For what has Grace to do with the things of Nature And as they follow their Principle so I follow mine For not conceiving this Internal Light as any thing superadded to the ordinary way of Man's Understanding but as that whereby he naturally and ordinarily Understands and not conceiving it after the manner of Grace neither I mean as to its simple Kind tho I allow it may have that Estimation in some of its Degrees but rather as according to the Natural Order of Human Understanding I had no reason to confine it as the Quakers do to Divine and Spiritual Truths but to extend it to all Truth without Exception which I suppose to be equally perceivable in this Divine Light which as being the very Essence of God must be equally exhibitive of all But Mr. Vickris will still have it an Abuse to say that the Quakers confine the Light
within For says he It is Divine Supernatural and Uncircumscribable and in it are hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge Alluding I suppose to that of the Apostle concerning Christ Col. 2. 3. But tho they do make it to be Divine and Supernatural yet I do not see how they can make it or he can call it Uncircumscribable since as has been observ'd in the preceeding Pages they do not make it to be the proper Essence or Substance of God but a certain middle Nature between God and Man And for the same reason he cuts himself off from all Pretence to that Text concerning the Divine Word that in him are hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge which indeed is very applicable and carries a very apposite and emphatic Sense upon my Hypothesis who make the Divine Light within to be the very Divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himself the Substantial and Essential Wisdom of God but must be altogether usurp't upon his who either does or by the Principles of Quakerism is obliged to make it not the very Essence of the Deity but something of a middle Nature But says he Have they not testified and declared the Light and the Spirit of Truth are all one and the same Being which will guide into all Truth Joh. 16. 13. And I do not at present well remember whether they have or no hor shall I give my self the Trouble to enquire thinking it altogether impertihent But sure I am that they have often testify'd and declar'd that the Light is not the proper Essence of God but a certain middle Being between God and Man and if they will afterwards testify and declare that 't is the very same with the Spirit of Truth which is really and truly God I think they will evidently testifie against themselves and declare Contradictions and then 't is no great matter what thy testifie or declare But besides suppose they did make the Light to be one and the same with the Spirit of Truth which according to that of St. John will guide into all Truth yet 't is plain from the foregoing Measures that they must and from the Context of the place that they ought to mean it only of Spiritual Saving and necessary Truths which may very well confist with their supposed Confinement of the Light But how can this be so confined when Mr. Vickris testifies again and declares that the Divine Light does assist the Natural Faculties of the Soul in the Attainment of Arts and Sciences But how is this consistent with what he says in the Beginning of his Book where he calls this Corrupt Wisdom and the Forbidden Fruit and what will prove Folly in the End and the Wisdom that is Below and that which God's Wisdom from Above ever did and will confound See the Inconsistency and Unsincerity of this Writer When it would serve his turn to disparage and down Human Learning then 't is Corrupt Wisdom Forbidden Fruit and I know not what And when he had another turn to serve that is to contradict me then this Wisdom as corrupt as it is is taught us by the Instruction of the Divine Light But stay Sir tho this Divine Light be not as you say the very Essence of God yet is it so far divided against him as to teach what is contrary to him and what his Wisdom ever did and will confound Are the Divine Light and the Divine Wisdom at such Defiance with each other But 't is Mr. Vickris that is at Defiance with himself and I am afraid will not easily be reconciled For if the Divine Light teaches this sort of Wisdom then 't is not Corrupt which contradicts what he said in the other place and if this sort of Wisdom be Corrupt then the Divine Light does not teach it as being a Pure and Clean Principle and such as cannot consent to any Evil or Wickedness which contradicts what he says here So that either way Contradiction is his Doom As to what I said concerning the Quakers making the Light within a Supplement to Scripture c. it was not intended as a direct and particular Objection against them of it self but only to confirm the other wherein they are charged with confining it to Moral and Spiritual Truths in order to the Direction of Practice For that being the acknowledged End and Use of Scripture it seems an high Presumption that what is made a Supplement to the Scripture is also intended for the very same End and Use And therefore Mr. Vickris need not have opposed himself against this as a direct and particular Objection it being not by me either intended or used as such For whatever my Thoughts may be concerning the Sufficiency or Insufficiency of the Scripture without the inward Light I had no occasion then nor have any Mind at present to engage in a Dispute about that matter Only I would desire Mr. Vickris and his Brethren by the way to consider whether they can answer that Argument of Episcopius whereby he proves the Vanity and Absurdity of the Spiritualists as he calls them in making the Inward Word the Interpreter of Scripture Either says he they will have that inward Word as they call it to have an intelligible Sense in it or not to have an intelligible Sense If they will have it to contain an intelligible Sense then they must grant that that Sense being perceiv'd by the Understanding may be pronounc'd and express'd by outward Speech And if so then it follows that this Sense may also be written since whatever is pronounc'd by the Mouth may also be express'd in writing But then this written Sense will again be nothing else than an external Word which being exprest in Letters will according to them be nothing else but an inky Letter or Scripture which they deny to be sufficient But if they will have this inward Word to have in it no intelligible Sense or that may be pronounc'd or written then it will necessarily follow that this their Word is no Word or only a vain and foolish Word For such must that Word be which has no Intelligible Sense If they say that this Word is not perceiv'd but by him upon whom it is immediately impress'd by God Then I say again Either it is impress'd without any intelligible Sense or with it If without any then the same Difficulty will return viz. That 't is a vain and foolish Word But if it be imprinted with intelligible Sense then what hinders but that it may be expressed and written And then how will it differ from that written Word we have hitherto treated of But he tells me that these Words Supplement to Scripture are my own not theirs It may be so I will not stand with Mr. Vickris for a Word since he is so kind to me as to acknowledg all that I intended by it namely That the Light is the Interpreter of Scripture and that the Scripture is not sufficient without it
Spiritual Truths but even to the Natural and Ordinary Acts of Understanding I do not therefore find Fault with the Quakers for holding such a thing as the Light within so far from that that I very much out-do them in the Latitude of the Principle as making it more necessary and more extensive than they I do not as some do disapprove of the Doctrin in general but have a very convincing Assurance of it and a very awful Regard and Veneration for it as a very Noble and Sacred Theory But that which I condemn in the Quakers as to this Point is their particular manner of stating and explaining the general Notion of the Light within which I think to be as Gross and Absurd as the Notion it self in general is fine and rational And that upon this double Account I. Because they make it to be a Creature II. Because they make it a Material Creature Upon which two Grounds I question not but that I shall be able so to demonstrate the Falsehood and Absurdity of this grand Article of Quakerism as to render it utterly uncapable of Defence even tho Mr. Barclay himself were now alive to be my Opposer But because this is to be the Ground and Bottom of the following Discourse and that I may not be thought to contend against a Supposititious Notion or Imaginary Absurdity I must take care in the first place that this which is to be the Foundation of all be well laid by proving plainly and undeniably that the Quakers do represent their Light within after the manner already intimated viz. As a Creature and as a Material Creature before I undertake to expose their Absurdity in so doing In order to which I must give an Account of this Light within and shew what it is according to the Quakers Wherein I believe so little have the Principles of Quakerism been enquired into even by those that nevertheless take the liberty to laugh at them I shall tell a great many even of the Learned World a considerable piece of News And here to reduce the matter to as narrow a Compass as may be there being nothing wherein I admire Brevity more than in Quotations I shall be content to take my Account from two of their most eminent and approved Writers Mr. Barclay and Mr. Keith and to prevent all suspicion of Misrepresentation shall deliver it in their own express Words Thus then Mr. Barclay speaking of the Universal and Saving-Light of Christ By this Seed Grace and Word of God and Light wherewith we say every Man is enlightned 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 which is not divisible into Parts and Measures as being a most pure simple Being void of all Composition or Division and therefore can neither be resisted hurt wounded crucified or slain by all the Efforts and Strength of Men. But we understand a Spiritual Heavenly and Invisible Principle in which God as Father Son and Spirit dwells A measure of which Divine and Glorious Life is in all Men as a Seed which of its own Nature draws invites and inclines to God And this we call Vehiculum Dei or the Spiritual Body of Christ the Flesh and Blood of Christ which came down from Heaven of which all the Saints do feed and are thereby nourish'd unto Eternal Life From which Account of Mr. Barclay it is plain 1. That they do not make their Light within to be God for he says they understand not by it the proper Essence and Nature of God and consequently must make it to be a Creature there being no Medium between God and the Creature 2. That they do also make it to be a Material Creature since he supposes it divisible into Measures and Portions calls it Vehiculum Dei and the Spiritual Body of Christ and that Flesh and Blood of his which came down from Heaven and which is both Food and Nourishment to the Saints None of which Affections can with any tolerable Congruity agree to a Spiritual Substance strictly so call'd Again says Mr. Barclay discoursing of the Communion or Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ The Body then of Christ which Believers partake of is Spiritual and not Carnal and his Blood which they drink of is pure and Heavenly and not Human or Elementary If it be asked what that Body what that Flesh and Blood is I answer it is that Heavenly Seed that Divine Spiritual Celestial Substance of which we spake before in the 5th and 6th Propositions the place just before quoted This is that Vehiculum Dei or Spiritual Body of Christ whereby and wherethrough he communicateth Life to Men and Salvation to as many as believe in him and receive him and whereby also Man comes to have Fellowship and Communion with God Again says he That this Body and Spiritual Flesh and Blood of Christ is to be understood of that Divine and Heavenly Seed before spoken of by us appears both by the Nature and Fruits of it And again That Christ understands the same thing here by his Body Flesh and Blood which is understood John 1. By the Light enlightning every Man appears c. Again As Jesus Christ did by the Eternal Spirit offer up that Body meaning his Carnal Body for a Propitiation for the Remission of Sins so hath he likewise poured forth into the Hearts of all Men a measure of that Divine Light and Seed wherewith he is cloathed c. I shall quote but one Passage more from Mr. Barclay to this purpose and 't is in his last Discourse concerning the Possibility and Necessity of inward Immediate Revelation where having distinguish'd between Natural and Supernatural Ideas he says As the Natural Ideas are stir'd up in us by outward and natural Bodies so those Divine and Supernatural Ideas are stirr'd up in us by a certain Principle which is a Body in Naturals in relation to the Spiritual World and therefore may be call'd a Divine Body Not as if it were a part of God who is a most pure Spirit but the Organ or Instrument of God by which he worketh in us and stirreth up in us these Ideas of Divine things This is that Flesh and Blood of Christ by which the Saints are nourish'd which is a Mystery to all unregenerated and meer natural men c. Here we meet with a Continuation of the same Notion For as in the former Instances he made the Light to be all one with the Spiritual Body of Christ and again reciprocally the Spiritual Body of Christ to be the self-same thing with the Light so now supposing our Spiritual Ideas to be raised by a Divine Body he makes this Divine Body to be no other than that Flesh and Blood of Christ by which
the Saints are nourish'd and which he had before made all one with the Light and consequently he makes the Light to be a Divine Body For if the Light be the same with that Flesh and Blood of Christ by which the Saints are nourish'd and if that Flesh and Blood be a Divine Body then 't is plain that the Light is also a Divine Body So much at present for Mr. Barclay Now let Mr. Kieth take his turn who in his Way to the City of God speaking of the Divine Seed which they always make one and the same with the Light says That it is call'd oft in Scripture the Body of Christ and his Flesh and Blood which the Soul feeding upon becomes cloath'd therewith as with a Body and thereby dwelleth in Christ and liveth in him as the Branch in the Vine Again The Saints feel it namely the Divine Seed or Light in them as really to be a Part or Particle of the very Substance of Heaven viz. Of that Spiritual and invisible Heaven where the Saints live as they do feel the Body of their outward Man to be a Part or Particle of the Substance of this outward World Again he says that this Divine Seed or Light is not the Godhead it self but a certain middle Nature Substance or Being betwixt the Godhead and Mankind c. This will be thought the more strange says he by many because they have been commonly taught and have commonly received it that there is no middle Substance betwixt the Godhead and us at least as to the inward For they have supposed that the Spirit or Mind of a Man or an Angel is next unto the Godhead which I deny for the Heavenly or Divine Substance or Essence of which the Divine Birth was both conceiv'd in Mary and is inwardly conceiv'd in the Saints is of a middle Nature And lest by their Calling as they often do this Substance a Divine Substance they should be thought to imply that it was the very Substance of God he takes care to lay in a Caution against any such Construction in the next Paragraph This middle Nature says he I call a Divine Substance or Essence not as if it were the Godhead it self or a Particle or Portion of it but because of its Excellency above all other things next unto the Godhead as on such an Account Men do call other things Divine which are very excellent yea some call Holy Men Divine and some call these who teach the things of God Divines as John who wrote the Revelations is call'd John the Divine Also this excellent and intermediate Being may be call'd the Divine Being because the Godhead is most immediately manifest therein and dwelleth in it as in the most Holy Place or Holy of Holies He further tells us speaking of the Conception of the Virgin Mary that God did really sow a most Divine and Heavenly Seed in the Virgins Womb and that by Vertue of this Christ had a Divine Perfection and Vertue and that Substantial above all other Men. Again he says that his Body hath not only the Perfections of our Body but also much more because of its being generate not only of the Seed of Mary but of a Divine Seed and that this Divine Seed is that Vniversal Balsom or Medicin to cure and restore not only all Mankind but also the whole outward Creation That this is the Little Leaven that shall Leaven the whole Lump of this visible Creation whereby all things shall be made new c. That this is that Stone of the Wise Men which by its Touch shall in due time change not only the Bodies of the Saints but the Body of the whole Creation and purge it from all its Weakness and Impurity For says he what can perfectly cure and restore the Sick and Diseased Body of Nature either in Man or in other things but his incorruptible Body c. All which Expressions do plainly intimate that this Divine Seed whereof Christ was generated and we are regenerated for according to them that which was the Principle of Christ's Natural Birth is the Principle of our Spiritual Birth was really a material corporeal Substance and since the Light is by them supposed to be all one with this Divine Seed it is very evident that they make the Light to be also a material corporeal Principle The short of this matter lies in this Form of Argument The Divine Seed whereof Christ was naturally generated and whereby we are regenerated is a Body But the Light within is one and the same thing with this Divine Seed Therefore the Light within is a Body And thus do these two great Pillars of Quakerism Mr. Barclay and Mr. Keith agree with each other and both of them in this in making the Light within not to be God or a Substance properly Divine but to be a Creature and more than that to be a Material and Corporeal Creature But that the Reader may have yet a more full Account and more clear and exact Comprehension of this matter I will take their Hypothesis from the very Ground and Bottom of it and resolve it into certain distinct Principles or Suppositions which as far as I am able to gather from the forecited and other like Passages that occur up and down in their Writings are such as these 1. They 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 a Carnal Body and a Spiritual Body 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 They are the very Words of Mr. Barclay which because they are of particular concernment I will set down at large 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 Which I think is an express Declaration for a Twofold Body of Christ the Body wherein he was Incarnate and a Body antecedent to his Incarnation 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 that this is properly that Seed of God mention'd by St. Peter and St. John which was sown in the Womb of the Virgin and in the Hearts of Mankind that whereby Christ was naturally generated and whereby the Saints are regenerated that this is that Heavenly Manna that Living Bread discours'd of in the Sixth of St. John that Divine Aliment upon which the Saints do feed and whereby they are nourish'd unto everlasting Life 6. And Lastly they do also suppose that this Spiritual Body of Christ wherein his Human Soul existed before his Incarnation a measure whereof is given as a Divine Seed to every Man to Leven Season and Sanctifie his Nature and by closing and uniting with which our Nature becomes actually Sanctified that this I say is that very Divine Light which God has set up as a Monitor Instructer and Teacher in the Hearts of Men to guide and direct them in the way of Salvation That this Spiritual Body of Christ is what they suppose to be the Light of Mankind I need appeal to no other Evidence than the latter part of the first Quotation out of Mr. Barclay where he says that they understand by the Light a Spiritual Heavenly and Invincible Principle in which God as Father Son and Spirit dwells a measure of which Divine and Glorious Life is in all Men as a Seed which of its own nature draws invites and inclines to God And this we call observe Vehiculum Dei or the Spiritual Body of Christ the Flesh and Blood of Christ which came down from Heaven of which all the Saints do Feed and are thereby nourished unto Eternal Life By which I think it is plain as far as Mens meanings may be gather'd from their Words that they make the Light within to be the Spiritual Body of Christ or a certain measure or Portion of that Body And thus having according to the best of my Understanding and Observation given an Extract of the Quakers Principle concerning the Light within which I have so well consider'd both before and after the framing it that I can with good assurance stand by it and dare appeal to all the Learned of that way whether I have not given a true and just account of their Principle I now hasten to the Second part of my Undertaking to expose the Grossness and Absurdity of it 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 Antients 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 surprize and amusement of the stiffer and severer sort of Divines readvanc'd 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 deduc'd 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 a 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 But that which I dislike and condemn here is their making this Spiritual Body of Christ to be the Light within that Light which is to teach Man Wisdom and Knowledge and to be his constant Tutor Monitor and Director which notion of the Light within notwithstanding that I highly approve of the thing it self I take to be extreamly gross and absurd and that upon those Two Accounts before touch'd upon 1. Because hereby they make it to be a Creature 2. Because they make it a Material Creature That they do make the Light to be a Creature and a Material Creature is sufficiently shewn already in the account that I have given of their notion concerning it I am now only to lay open the absurdity of this And First 'T is absurd to make the Light within to be a Creature Monsieur Malebranche considering with himself of all the possible ways whereby we may come to have the Ideas of things without us makes this Division or Enumeration of them It is necessary says he that these Ideas should either proceed from the Objects or that our Mind has a power of producing them or that God should produce them either with the Mind when he Creates it or occasionally as often as we think of any Object Or that the Mind should possess in it self all the Perfections which it sees in things Or else lastly that it be united to some Absolutely Perfect Being that includes in himself all the Perfections of Created Beings And these are all the possible ways of Human Understanding that this excellent Theorist could conceive or thought conceivable But this 't is to have a dull Invention and a straitness of Imagination that is not open enough to let in a full view of things We now meet with a sort of Philosophers of a freer Prospect and more inlarged Survey that have found out another mode of furnishing the Mind with Ideas and that is by its being united to some Created Being and that too a Material one Strange that so inquisitive and so working a Head as that of M. Malebranche should be so defective in his Enumeration as not to hit upon this most wonderful Expedient of uniting the Soul to a Creature in order to its Illumination But sure he could not overlook it but rather thought it too inconsiderable to be mention'd 'T was no doubt very easie and obvious for him to have consider'd that the last Member of
his Distribution might have been divided into Two only by making his Supposition run first in general that the Mind be united to some Being or other and then by distinguishing that general into Created or Increated This I say he might easily have done and in point of exact order and Method perhaps should have done but not dreaming that any would ever be so extravagantly gross as to resolve the Illumination of the Mind into its union with any Creature and not in the least questioning but that if Men were once come so far into the right path as to make the Illumination of the Mind to depend upon its Union with some Being or other they would have no further scruple upon them whether this Being were God or no he chose rather to pass over all union with the Creature in Silence and to make this his last and only further supposable way of inlightning the Mind that it be united to some absolutely perfect Being that includes in himself all the Perfections of Created Beings Which no doubt is the only Basis upon which an Intelligible Hypothesis of Human Understanding can ever be raised And I cannot but greatly wonder that those who come up so very near it should yet upon a suddain turn off and pass it by The Quakers seem with M. Malebranche to disclaim and renounce the Four First of the ways proposed and they agree with him so far in the Fifth and last as to resolve the Illumination of the Soul into its Union with some Being or other But herein they divide and take several ways in that M. Malebranche makes this Being to be God who is absolutely Perfect and all-comprehensive eminently and vertually all and the Quakers will needs have it to be a Created Being Which Hypothesis I think to be very Absurd 1. As needless 2. As impossible 1. It is a needless Hypothesis For if the Soul of Man be not sufficient to be a Light to it self but its Illumination must be resolv'd into its union with some other Being which these Men implicitly grant when they resolve it into its Union with a Created Being then what Being so fit and proper for this purpose as God who by reason of the Immensity and Spirituality of his Nature must needs be intimately present to all Minds and by reason of the Infinity of his Essential Perfection must needs have in himself after an eminent and intelligible manner all the Degrees of Being and consequently the Ideas of all things If there be a Being so qualined certainly our Illumination must be resolv'd into our Union with that Being And if there be a God then there must be a Being so qualified And therefore it must be from our Union with him that all our Light and Knowledge is derived who would of himself sufficiently inlighten Man not only without the Conjunction but even without the Coexistence of any other Creature For I would demand of these Men that contend for a Created Light an Answer to this one Question Suppose God should annihilate all the whole Creation except one Intelligent Spirit so that there should be nothing in being but that single Spirit and Himself would this Spirit upon the removal of all his Fellow Creatures out of being cease to understand or no I know upon their Principle they must say that he would as supposing his capacity of Knowledge to depend upon his Union with a certain Created Being viz. the Spiritual Body of Christ But setting aside their Principle which is the thing under Question and therefore must not be used as a Medium to prove another thing by I see no reason in the nature of the thing it self why they should say that such a Spirit would in such a Supposition cease to understand and I think there is all the reason in the World to suppose he would not as being still notwithstanding this great and Universal Emptiness united most intimately to a Being of Absolute and Infinite Perfection and that contains in himself the Ideas of all things Certainly this great and Universal Representative would be a sufficient Light to that Solitary Spirit who would not want Thoughts or Ideas tho he might want a Companion to Communicate them to And therefore tho the Notion were otherwise never so possible and consistent yet it is altogether needless to seek out for Union with any Creature in order to that Illumination which considering the Omnipresence and All-perfection of God must needs be supposed tho there were no other Creature besides one Intelligent Spirit in being But as this is needless so 2. It is also an impossible Hypothesis It is absolutely impossible that a Creature should be a Light to Man or that one Creature should be a Light to another God is the great Luminary of the whole Intellectual World and 't is he only that can be a Light either to the Soul of Man or to any other Intelligent Being No Creature tho never so glorious and excellent not even the Human Soul of Jesus Christ much less his Spiritual Body can ever be a Light to the Mind of Man For to be a Light to the Mind is to be to it the Principle of Understanding to furnish it with Ideas and to be the formal and immediate Object of its Conception And for this there are Two Conditions necessarily required First That it be intimately present and united to the Mind Secondly That it have the whole Perfection of Being so as to have the Ideas 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 Were a Creature never so excellent yet it would be of a finite Perfection and consequently of such a certain determinate order rank kind or species that is it would be such a particular degree of Being It would not be all Being or Being at large for then it would be God but only such a definite and determinate degree of it And consequently were it never so intimately united to my Mind it could be able to represent only it self and such degrees of being as were in it self That is it might represent it self and all that is of the same kind with it self but it could not represent any thing else for it could not represent more degrees of Being than it had It could not therefore represent any Creature of another Order from it self as a Sun suppose could not represent a Tree nor a Triangle a Circle since each of these have degrees of Being that are not in the other and consequently cannot be represented by the other For this is a most undoubted Principle that nothing can represent any more degrees of Being than it has Suppose your Creature therefore of never so raised and excellent an Order it would be able to represent only it self and those of the same Species And what a poor account would this turn