Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	body_n	soul_n	union_n	2,456	5	9.5499	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52440	Two treatises concerning the divine light the first, being an answer to a letter of a learned Quaker, which he is pleased to call, A just reprehension to John Norris for his unjust reflections on the Quakers, in his book entituled, Reflections upon the conduct of human life, &c., the second, being a discourse concerning the grossness of the Quakers notion of the light within, with their confusion and inconsistency in explaining it / by John Norris ...	Norris, John, 1657-1711.; Norris, John, 1657-1711. Grossness of the Quaker's principle.	1692 (1692)	Wing N1276; ESTC R2996	64,661	150

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

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

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

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