Some of the Many FALLACIES OF WILLIAM PENN DETECTED In a Paper called GOSPEL TRUTHS Signed by him and Three more at Dublin the 4th of the 3d Month 1698. And in his late Book called A Defence of Gospel Truths Against the Exceptions of the B. of Cork's Testimony concerning that Paper With some Remarks on W. P. his unfair and unjust Treatment of him To which is added A Synopsis or short View of W. Penn's Deism Collected out of his Book called A Discourse of the General Rule of Faith c. By GEORGE KEITH LONDON Printed for Benj. Tooke at the Middle-Temple-Gate in Fleet-street 1699. THE PREFACE Christian Reader THE following Treatise is not intended to be any direct or compleat Answer to the Book called A Defence of a Paper entituled Gospel-Truths against the Exceptions of the Bishop of Cork 's Testimony By William Penn. Printed 1698 that Work belonging not to me but to the Bishop of Cork who as I am certainly informed doth intend to give him a meet Answer to his Book In the mean while I hoped it would be acceptable both to the Bishop and to many good Christians thus far to interpose in the Defence of the Common Cause of the Christian Faith especially in the detecting of some of the greatest Fallacies W. P. hath used in his Book under a seeming Disguise and Vizard of Christianity really to undermine and destroy it I being of late Years better acquainted with W. P's Fallacious way of Writing than probably the Bishop of Cork is If this small Treatise comes to the Bishop's Hand before he publish his Answer to W. P. he will find that he hath been more charitable to him than indeed he deserved and that he had in his large Charity judged him more Orthodox than he really is although W. P. has made but an ill use of his Charity and has badly requited him with many uncivil as well as unjust Reflections some of which I thought it was but Justice that I should vindicate the Bishop from and the rather because I suppose the Bishop's Innocency and Station may lead him in great part to neglect them as not being so proper for him to notice as for another that stands by and beholds their mutual Treatment of each other which according to my best understanding and observation as fair as it hath been on the Bishop's part hath been as unfair on the part of W. P. who as he treats him not with the least due respect to his Station so nor indeed as a Christian Some of the many Fallacies of William Penn detected in a Paper called Gospel Truths c. Section 1. W. P 's Fallacy in calling the Illumination of the Holy Ghost which to him is nothing but the common Illumination given to all Mankind together with the Scriptures a double and agreeing Record of true Religion His false Notion of Heaven and Hell denying the Locality of them His abusive Reflection on the Bishop of Cork his keeping the true Hell to himself His Fallacy in pretending to the Bishop that he owned the Holy Trinity where as in his Sandy Foundation he hath expresly denied it and argued against it His denying that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem to be properly the Son of God His denying that the Body of Christ was any part of Christ and his agreement with G. W. and other Quakers in denying the Humanity of Christ to be any part of the true Christ Page 1. HE saith The Testimony of the Scriptures of Truth and the Illumination of the Holy Ghost are the double and agreeing Record of true Religion In this he is very Fallacious in the very entrance this Illumination of the Holy Ghost he will have to be that which is given to be a general Rule to all Mankind see his Discourse concerning the General Rule of Faith and Life Printed by T. Sowle 1699. But how is that together with the Scriptures a double and agreeing Record whereas that general Rule that he contendeth is given to all Mankind to wit that general Illumination as given to Infidel Jews Mahometans and the Heathen World is no Record to any one Article of the Apostles Creed or any one peculiar Doctrine of Christianity but only to some few Precepts of Morality and general Piety towards God Yea W. P. hath confessed see his Page 32 of that Discourse That neither he nor his Brethren have any new superadded Revelation concerning Adam's Fall and Christ's Birth Death and Sufferings c. and saith It is not necessary Therefore the Illumination that he sets up for the General Rule to Quakers and Heathens is not any Record agreeing with the Scriptures in any one particular Article of the Christian Faith or positive Precept of the Gospel peculiar to the Christian Religion as distinct from Deism and Heathenism Page 2. In his first Section the makes the eternal Reward of Happiness to be given to all them that fear God without the least mentioning of any Faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ considered as both God and Man towards the obtaining the eternal Happiness nor is there the least hint of any such Faith being necessary in all his Sections And whereas he saith They that fear him not shall be turned into Hell as the Bishop of Cork did well observe What W. P. means by Hell by that Paper no one knows but elsewhere what he means either by Heaven or Hell he hath sufficiently told us in his Rejoinder to J. Faldo p. 179. viz. To assert the Locality of Heaven and Hell is too Carnal indeed Mahometan Seeing them W. P. doth not own any place without us to be either Heaven or Hell it is easie to understand what Heaven or Hell W. P. is for to wit the Light within that 's his only Heaven and Darkness within his only Hell which is the old Ranters Notion that is destructive to the great Fundamentals of Christianity such as that Christ is bodily ascended into a real Local Heaven without us which Heavens all the Saints shall after the Resurrection in their glorified Bodies he taken up into and the Bodies of the Wicked together with their Souls shall be cast into Hell that is a place of Torment as really as the other is a place of Joy and Felicity It is prodigiously Shameful and Astonishing in W. P. that though he knew in his Conscience he did not mean Hell in the common sense of Christians which without doubt is the Bishop's sense to wit a real place of Torment without us yet that he should so treat the Bishop and so rudely and unchristianly reflect upon him by a consequence as false as it is foul and dirty saying in his Page 40 either one of these is an Article of his belief or else he keeps the true Hell to himself Page 2. In his second Section though he professeth to express his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture Words that there are Three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the
Propitiation in order to remission of Sins can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion so by good consequence contrariwise whoever believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians to wit as outwardly Crucified Dead and Raised again c. can hardly believe any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion but W. P. believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in order to remission of Sin c. in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians therefore W. P. hardly believeth any fundamental Article of the Christian Religion to wit as peculiar to the same The first proposition is proved by the Rule of contraries from W. P's assertion as I think he will readily confess the second proposition which is the Assumption is fully proved from what is above at large quoted by me out of his former Books never to this day retracted by him And though he reckoneth up the Doctrine of the Trinity viz. of the Father of Christ the Son and of the Holy Ghost the Doctrine of Heaven and Hell the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust to be Fundamental Doctrines yea and the main of Christian Doctrine yet from what is above proved out of his Books he hath plainly opposed the true Christian Doctrine both of the Holy Trinity and of Heaven and Hell and as plainly he hath opposed the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust in their respective Bodies as I have fully proved in my third Narrative and so have his Brethren G. Whitehead Richard Hubberthorne and others only at present I shall quote these following passages out of some of his former Books in his Reason against Railing in answer to Tho. Hicks P. 138. he thus plainly argueth against the deceased Saints looking for any future Resurrection of the Body which Tho. Hicks argued for Is the Joy of the Ancients saith W. P. now in Glory imperfect or are they in Heaven but by halves But why must the Felicity of the Soul depend upon that of the Body Is it not to make the Soul a kind of Window to be without its beloved Body a better sort of Purgatory Again P. 134. If a thing can be the same and notwithstanding changed for shame let us never make so much stir against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for the absurdity of it is rather out-done than equalled by this carnal Resurrection Again in his answer to J. Faldo called the Invalidity of J. Faldo's Vindication P. 369. It 's sown a Natural Body It 's raised a Spiritual Body and I do utterly deny saith he that this Text is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's carnal Body at all but the States of Men under the First and Second Adam Men are sown into the World Natural but they are raised Spiritual through him who is the Resurrection and the Life and so they are Sons of the Second Adam Nor need any to wonder why W. P. and his Brethren should disbelieve all these fundamental Doctrines of Christianity which now he professeth to own and that as Fundamental but still quite in a most differing Sense from all true Christians for with what certainty can he or they believe them they acknowledge not the Holy Scriptures to be the Rule of their Faith in any of these things or indeed of any others they have no certainty of the Truth of any of these he now calls Fundamentals from the Rule of Faith set up by them which is the Light within them with respect to its ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind but none of these Fundamental Doctrines above mentioned fall within these ordinary Discoveries as W. P. hath confessed for they belong to extraordinary Revelation And if he should affirm they did belong to the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind he cannot prove it What obscure Knowledge any of them called Heathen Philosophers had of any of these great Mysteries W. P. cannot prove they had it from the Light within but Traditionally either from the Jews and ancient Patriarchs and Prophets or from some among themselves prophetically inspired as it is reported of the Sybils the which report were it true doth not prove that the Knowledge and Faith of these great Fundamentals did fall within the ordinary discoveries of the Light within given to Mankind in general Section 5. His uncivil Treatment of the Bishop as if he did render the Text 1 John 5. 7. defective whereas the Bishop only charg'd the Defect on W. P 's Confession which though given in Scripture words yet not in the true Sense of Scripture His Fallacious Argument against the Holy Trinity answered His Fallacy and Equivocation about his calling him who was born of the Virgin Mary Jesus Christ and the Son of God whereas he hath denied him to be properly so And his abusive Treatment of the Bishop on that Head IN his Page 30 he proceeds in his unchristian and uncivil Treatment of the Bishop unjustly charging him as if the Text 1 John 5. 7. were defective with the Bishop and as if he did render the Text it self short which saith W. P. with submission I think is a bold Attempt in one of his Station If he believes the 39 Articles But all this is nothing but a Scandalous Reflection on the Bishop and a Shuffling and Cover wherewithall to hide his own Error and Incredulity The Bishop might well enough without charging any defect on the Text as he doth not in the least charge a defect on this Confession of W. P. and his Brethren because though given in one Scripture Text yet he had just cause to question not to be given in the true sense of that Scripture for most that are unsound as touching the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity even Socinians as well as others will profess yea and have professed to give their Faith in the Text yea and all other Texts of the like nature who yet are professed Unbelievers of the true Doctrine of the Holy Trinity And though W. P. and his Brethren will frankly confess they believe that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God one in Substance and Essence and thus think to clear themselves of Sociniansm yet he and they at the same time are grosly guilty of Sabellianism acknowledging no distinction betwixt Father Son and Holy Ghost other than Nominal or at most in Manifestation and Operation ad extra and with relation to the Creatures So that W. P's Notion and Faith of the Holy Trinity which he calls the Scripture Trinity but it is not the Scripture Trinity but the Sabellian Trinity is no other than this that as the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God one Essence and Being so the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father and the Holy Ghost is the Son and the Son is the Holy Ghost for as I have quoted him above in his Sandy Foundation he disputeth not
in a publick Meeting with Blasphemy for asserting it but whither the Body of Christ now since his Ascension is in all things and every where If not every where then but some where and that some-where is a Local Heaven which W. P. hath said is Mahometan E. Burrough charg'd John Bunnion with Wickedness for saying Christ was in Heaven in our Nature And for the same did G. Whitehead blame John Horn as I have shewn in my Narratives And saith G. W. in his Nature of Christianity p. 41. That Christ existeth outwardly bodily without us at God's right hand What Scripture hath he viz. his Opponent R. G. for these words W. Bailey will have it That Christ ascended into Heaven in no body but what came down from Heaven All which and much more is proved out of my three Narratives the third especially And whereas he saith Let it be never so true it cannot affect the People if not the act of the People the Church of England has Doctors of very differing Sentiments c. I answer what any one of your Teachers have asserted in Print especially it affects your Second days Meeting that licenseth all your Teachers Books and yet profess to be all one and the same in all that ye believe as God and Truth is the same And if the Church of England hath Teachers of different Sentiments in lesser Matters yet not in Fundamentals so far as she knows and if they had and she should know it and not censure them it would affect her From all which it appears that W. P. and his Brethrens Conciseness in their Gospel Truths was on purpose in general Terms to cover their gross Errors And where Men are sound in the Faith and of known Sincerity what is implied in their words may in Charity and Justice be granted but not if they be Insincere and given to equivocate as is the present Case Section 6. His Fallacy in asserting that his owning future Rewards and Punishments in his Sense doth imply his owning the Resurrection of the Dead which it is proved he hath disowned His unjust Offence at the Bishop's Censure of his unsound Notion of the Light within and his uncivil Treatment of the Bishop on that account as if he were a meer Natural Man a Persecuter a Nicodemus in the Knowledge of Regeneration The Bishop's Doctrine of the Light within more sound and intelligible than that of W. P. By W. P 's Definition of Light within and Sight within a Natural Man is capable to understand it though in contradiction to himself W. P 's Ignorance in making the natural rational Faculty to be all the Spiritual Sight even in Regenerated Persons The Bishop's Doctrine of the Light within and Spiritual Sight of regenerated Persons as more sound so more sublime than that of W. P. IN Page 43 he proceeds in the like Fallacy and Equivocation alledging That their acknowledging the future state of the Just and Unjust implys the resurrection of the Dead which as it is true in a Scripture sense it is as false in his sense and in the sense of all others of his Heathen Brethren many of whom professed to believe the immortality of Men's Souls both Greek and Latin yet that profession did not imply they believed the resurrection of the Body either of the Just or Unjust for they generally disbelieved it and opposed the Christians for asserting it And that W. P. himself hath opposed the Resurrection of the Body is above sufficiently proved In his Page 51. and 52. W. P. seems not a little moved with the Bishops saying their discourse about the Light within as far as he can see is perfectly such as we usually call Banter that is when Men have a faculty to speak things seemingly profound but in the end neither themselves nor others can make any distinct Sense of what they have said This Modest Censure of the Bishop upon his discourse of the Light within in his 5th 6th and 7th Sections W. P. calls one of the severest Persecutions This to me saith he is one of the severest Persecutions because Spiritual things are only to be Spiritually discern'd and understood I would fain know saith he how a regenerate Man can possibly make a Carnal Man understand the new Birth yea he chargeth it to look Antichristian as well as unreasonable and he quotes diverse places of Scripture which he at least implicitly levels at the Bishop as if the Bishop were the Unregenerate and Natural Man that because he is so he cannot understand W. P's profound Doctrine of the Light within And the Bishop is he that is born after the Flesh who persecutes W. P. that 's born after the Spirit and his Brethren with Tongue and Pen when he and others such as he can no longer commit violence upon their Persons and Estates and as if the Bishop were a very Nicodemus in the Doctrine of the new Birth All which it plainly appears and much more W. P. indirectly and implicitly levels at the Bishop otherwise why quotes he such places of Scriptures with such large discourses on them if not to point to him and that his want of the new Birth and being but a Natural Man tho' not wanting Academical Learning made him uncapable of understanding W. P's Spiritual Doctrine about the Light within and after his instance of the blindness of the Scribes and Pharisees and the High-Priest of the Jews in not discerning the Messiah when he came he infers let the Bishop also have a care and he further tells the Bishop he should be glad to see the Bishop's evidence for the knowledge of God by the Revelation of the Son of God in his own Soul To give my sense freely so far as I am able to understand the Bishop hath given a better account and evidence of his knowledge in the Mystery of God and of Christ by his Christian Scriptural and sound expressions than W. P. and I suppose in his manner of Life is nothing inferior to him And what evidence of his true knowledge by Internall Illumination or Revelation can W. P. give or has given that the Bishop cannot give yea hath not given in this very case Is it enough for W. P. to say he has it and the Bishop has it not Or wherein do W. P's fruits of a holy Life give more evidence of his knowledge and experience of the new Birth than these of the Bishop I shall first take notice of the Bishop's sound words in giving his sense how the Conscience of Man is enlightned to know and believe aright the Doctrines and Articles of Faith necessary to Salvation Conscience saith the Bishop opened by the holy Spirit under the Ministry of the word Acts 16. 14. does and must take in its Light from holy Scripture quoting Psal 19. 8. Eph. 1. 18. Psal 119. 105. Isaiah 8. 20. Now these things saith he are intelligible this Rule is fixt and certain nothing of which can be said of your Light within
Opponents as guilty of Blasphemy for denying the sufficiency of the Light within to Salvation without any thing else Seeing that Light within is Christ for it is as much as to say Christ is not sufficient to Salvation And thus some of them have charged me in particular to whom I have answered that seeing Christ is truly Christ without us as well as within us and much more gloriously manifested in the Flesh without us If it is no blasphemy to say Christ without us cannot save us without his being in us as they will readily grant so nor is it Blasphemy to say Christ within us cannot save us without Christ without us And with respect to Christ's inward Teaching and Illumination they grosly and fallaciously prevaricate in stating the question as whither the Light within to wit the Word God is a Light sufficient to Teach or Guide every Man the way to Eternal Salvation Thus they think to have their Opponents every way at a disadvantage and to catch them in their Dilemma if they say Yea the Quakers have gained the point as they imagine If they say Nay they are guilty of Blasphemy against Christ the word God within them as not being sufficient But this Sophistical Dilemma is easily discovered and answered for by the sufficiency of the Light within every Man to guide to Salvation is not meant what Christ the Word God can reveal to and in every Man for who questions that that he can do it abundantly but the true state of the question is What he doth reveal to and in every Man that is or may be a sufficient discovery to him for his eternal Salvation W. P. and his Brethren hold the affirmative the Bishop and all true Christians Yea all but meer Deists hold the Negative viz. That Christ considered as the word God doth not reveal to and in every Man As for example not to any of the Quakers or any others here here in England all that is sufficient to their Salvation by the common Illumination without special superadded Illuminations of Christ by the Holy Spirit that is more excellent than the common in the use of the outward means to wit the Doctrines of the Holy Scriptures outwardly Preached or at leastwise read to us or by us If they say it doth then let them not only tell us but prove to us intelligibly to convince our Natural Rational Faculty which W. P. calleth the Eye or Sight whereby the Soul of every Man is capable to discern what the Light within sheweth that the Light in them by its common Illumination without all outward means of Instruction from or by the Holy Scriptures hath taught them one or more of the Twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed according to the true sense of Scripture and generally received by all true Christians If they confess it hath not taugh them any one of them it evidently follows that they think not any one of them is necessary to their Faith or Christianity i. e. their Deism for Salvation And yet it is strange that W. P. should be so fallacious as as to affirm that the Doctrines of God of Christ of the Holy Ghost of remission of Sin and Justification from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation the Resurrection of the Dead are Fundamentals of the Christian Religion none of which the Light within them without Scripture hath taught him to believe as I think he hath plainly confessed and yet it hath taught him all that is necessary to his Salvation without Scripture he having denyed that the Scripture is the Rule of his or their Faith as touching any of these matters and consequently not so much as the Instrument whereby the Holy Spirit has wrought that Faith in him therefore what Faith he or they have of these things is but Historical and Uncertain and as the old Heavens that must pass away and which hath already passed away from them seeing they pretend they are come to the new Heavens already And yet he is so fallacious to say P. 97. It is generally thought that we do not hold the common Doctrines of Christianity but have introduced new and erroneous ones in lieu thereof This I have sufficiently proved to be true here and elsewhere and so have others done the same But what followeth Whereas saith he we plainly and entirely believe the Truths contained in that called the Apostles Creed Yes say I just so as he may say they plainly and entirely believe the Truths in the Turks Alcoran which may be supposed to have some Truths though many more falsities This saying of his seems to have a mental Reservation as if there were some things in that Creed that were not Truths W. P. would do well to tell us plainly what they are Section 9. Several places of Scripture rescued from his Perversions None are saved by the common discoveries of the Light within without special Revelation and Illumination which yet renders not Salvation impossible to virtuous Gentiles His Ignorance and Error about the Nature of the Light within considered as the Word God In his shewing what the Light within teacheth every Man he leaves out the chief matter that was necessary to his Argument to prove it sufficient without any thing else AND as for the places of Scripture which W. P. hath brought to prove the sufficiency of the Light within with respect to the common Illumination for every Man's Salvation without any super-added special Illumination and all external Light of the Holy Scripture which are these following John 8. 12. John 1. 9 14. Titus 2. 11 12. Eph. 5. 13. John 16. 7. Prov. 1. 20 to 24. John 8. 24. they are all one or two at most excepted that may be understood of the common Illumination as John 1. 9. to be understood of the Special Illumination given to Men under a Gospel-Ministry as is evident by the due consideration of them as for John 1. 9. allowing it to be meant of the common Illumination and diverse other places of Scripture that might be brought to prove that there is such a common Illumination from the word God in all Men as a preparatory Ministration this doth not prove that that common Illumination is sufficient without the special that is given to the Faithful And whereas he saith in his 6th Article or Section of his Gospel Truths They that turn not at the reproofs thereof to wit the Light within with respect to its common Illumination and will not repent and live and walk according to it shall dye in their Sins and where Christ is gone they shall never come Tho' there be a Truth in the words he has here set down yet he quite misapplies that place of Scripture John 8. 24. and fallaciously leaves out the foregoing words which are these For if ye believe not that I am he ye shall dye in your Sins and as it is in v 21. And whither I go ye cannot come by which words it is plainly evident
that the Discoveries that he sets up for are not the same to all Nations and Persons as can easily be proved Ten thousands would break through the Hedge of his General Rule of binding them to the common Discoveries given to all Mankind as most of the People called Quakers do and would highly pretend to new and special Discoveries given to them by the Light within and to none others and the reason they will alledge that it is not given to others is their Unfaithfulness and especially that like Corah they Rebel against their Spiritual Guides and Leaders Thus we may see the great need of an outward Rule and the great Goodness of God that he hath given us one full and perfectly sufficient to be a Rule of our Faith and Life in all necessary Cases And besides If W. P's Argument have any Truth in it it would infer that Christ or the Spirit abstractly considered from all Revelation both Internal and External should be the Rule because he is the Ruler If the Ruler and the Rule must still be one and the same thing then suppose all Revelation Internal as well as External should cease Christ or the Spirit should be the Rule because the Ruler Who sees not the Fallacy and Sophistry of W. P's Argument here Hath not every common Artificer his Rule of Wood or Brass that is not the Man himself but the Instrument that he hath made and prepared for his use The Prophets Rule by which their Faith was ruled in what they Prophecied was not the Spirit but the internal Revelation of the Spirit the Spirit was their Guide and Ruler but not to speak properly their Rule but the Revelation they had or things revealed that was their Rule and so now the external Revelation of the same Truths is the Rule of our Faith whereby to believe them as the Spirit inwardly by his secret Illumination perswades us of their Truth and certainty not by any new verbal Record but by Sealing to the Record outwardly given Section 12. His falsly alledging that he has the first Reformers Fathers and Martyrs on his side viz. That the Scripture is not the Rule of Faith but the Light in every Conscience His Fallacy in this detected in the late Book called The Deism of W. P. and his Brethren c. The Spirits being superior to the Scripture proves not that the Spirit is the Rule of Faith His pretended ground of his pitying the Bishop for his supposed Ignorance Causeless and Fallacious His false Accusation and Charge against the Bishop and Church of England and all Protestant Opponents to the Quakers that they confine the Operations of the Spirit to the first or Apostolical Times That the Ministers among the Quakers are less acted by the Spirit of God in their Praying and Preaching than the Ministers among their Protestant Opponents evidently proved AND this leads me to detect another Fallacy of his which shall be the last I intend to notice though I could detect many more but these I think will suffice to shew how Fallacious he is Let us therefore hear him once more In his Page 106 and 107 after he has most grosly alledged that he has the concurring Testimony and Assent of the best and first Reformers as well as Martyrs and Fathers to confirm his Fundamental viz. That not the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures without but the Light within is the Rule of Faith and Life and that the Light or Spirit within is something at least co-ordinate if not superior and antecedent to the Scripture Which is more saith he than we said before and consequently is the Rule of Faith and Life superior to the Scripture Having in my late Treatise of W. P's Deism rescued the Fathers and first Reformers from his Perversions I shall only now take notice of his fallacious Inference by this his Argument The Light or Spirit within is something superior and antecedent in way of Excellency to the Scripture therefore it is the superior and antecedent Rule above the Scripture the Proposition is granted and I know none that ever denied it to wit That the Spirit which is God is greater and more excellent than the Scripture But then it followeth not that it is the greater or more excellent Rule because properly speaking it is no Rule at all Right Logicians will tell him if he will go and learn of them which it is to be suspected for all that he was a Student at Oxford he has great need to do that things in a different kind are not to be compared If it were asked of W. P. whither a Knife of Gold or a Knife of Steel were the best Knife he would answer surely though Gold is superior to Steel and more excellent yet it is not fit to be a Knife and Men make not the blades of Knives of Gold So though the Spirit be superior to the Revelation of it whither Internal or External yet not the Spirit but his Revelation is the Rule and Internal Revelation was the Rule to the Prophets whereby they believed their Prophecies and what internal Revelation was to them external Revelation is to us though we have not that internal Revelation that they had which was Prophetical and Extraordinary but the Spirit internally by way of Seal Sealing to us the Truth and Certainty of the external Revelation gives us as sure ground for the certainty of our Faith as they had of theirs But this inward Seal of the Spirit is no Rule either co-ordinate with the Scripture or subordinate to it because it doth not propose to us by it self all the things necessary to be believed by us in verbal Propositions as the Seal of a Bond though it is a Proof and Evidence to the Truth of the Bond yet it tells us not the Contents of it And now because the Bishop found fault with his calling the Scripture without and the Illumination of the Spirit within the double and agreeing Record of true Religion as indeed well he might so do in W. P's sense though in a qualified and sober sense it may be acknowledged as perceiving the fallacious sense that W. P. had of those words well observed by the Bishop That they will not believe what Scripture saith except the Light within them dictate the same And yet none of them can justly say that the Light within doth dictate to them by it self one Article of that called the Apostles Creed yea W. P. doth not so much as pretend that it doth to him yet most uncivilly he falls upon the Bishop p. 107 telling him It must be his turn now to pity the Bishop And truly saith he I do it with all my Heart And this it seems in retaliation of the Bishop's tender Expression of his Pitty and Compassion towards some well-meaning Persons among them who are mislead by their Teachers But for what must he needs Pity the Bishop Why for his supposed Ignorance that he will not allow the Spirit to be
Christ to every Man so by W. P's Confession it hath not revealed these things to him or his Brethren for he grants they belong to extraordinary Revelation and fall not within the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind and are none of the absolute Necessaries of Religion and that such Revelation is not necessary and yet without such internal extraordinary Revelation of these things they cannot have the certain Faith of them as he confesseth Section 4. His Fallacy in pretending to own the Doctrine of Justification by Christ the Propitiation the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead to be Fundamentals of Christianity whereas he doth not in truth own any one of them His ill use of the Bishop's Charity by his own Argument retorted on himself it is proved he hath denied all the Fundamental Articles of Christianity The chief reason why W. P. and his Brethren believe not the Fundamentals of Christianity is That they deny the Holy Scripure to be the Rule of their Faith and set up the Light within to be the Rule which yet they confess doth not reveal to them any of those Fundamentals BY all which it plainly appeareth how disingenuous and fallacious W. P. hath been not only in the Paper called Gospel Truths published by him and his three Brethren but in his Answer to the Bishop of Cork on that Head yea and on all the other Heads it were easie to shew his Shuffling and Equivocation as well as his unfair and uncivil Treatment of him To detect which a little further let us consider W. P's words in answer to the Bishop of Cork p. 25 and 26. I am of opinion saith W. P. If he viz. the Bishop had well considered the Force and Comprehensiveness of our Belief concerning Christ That pleaseth him so well he might have saved himself the trouble of what he has published to the World upon the rest of them for whoever believes in Christ as a Propitiation in order to Remission of Sins and Justification of Sinners can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion Since every such Person must necessarily believe in God because it is with him alone Man is to be justified To be sure he must believe in Christ for that is the very Proposition he must also believe in the Holy Ghost because he is the Author of his Conviction Repentance and Belief he must believe Heaven and Hell Rewards and Punishments and consequently the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust For why should he be concerned about the being freed from the Guilt of his Sin if he were unaccountable in another World So that acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a Propitiation in order to the Remission of Sin comprehends the main Doctrine of the Christian Religion And as so many Lines drawn from the Circumference to the Center they all meet and center in Christ And indeed it is as the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion Were this confession of W. P. as sincere as it is seemingly fair it would prove that his Doctrine were indeed Christian and no doubt might and ought to give to the Bishop or any other that were doubtful in the case good Satisfaction of the Christianity of his Doctrine But that all this is meer paint and equivocation what I have above quoted out of his Books fairly and fully doth sufficiently prove That the profession W. P. made of his belief in his Gospel Truths pleased the Bishop so well whereof W. P. takes such particular and great notice and thereby takes occasion to blame his disingenuity as well as his troubling himself with publishing what he hath done to the World Yea W. P. makes it next to impossible that it was the first time the Bishop hath heard of that Doctrine among them viz. the acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a propitiation in order to the remission of Sins and Justifying them as Sinners from Guilt I say that this his profession pleased the Bishop so well did proceed from the Bishops great Charity and Moderation Charitably believing that W. P's Heart and Pen did go along together but as W. P. hath made an ill use of the Bishop's Charity and Judgment thus impertinently to reflect on him so it is fit the Bishop should be better acquainted with W. P's equivocations and double dealings with him which he may easily find out by an indifferent search into his former Books W. P. in his above mentioned confession professeth his belief in Christ as a propitiation and this he would seem to make the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion But what doth W. P. mean by Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such doth he mean the same that the Bishop meaneth and all sincere Christians Nay nothing less Christ within as he is the Light and Life as he offers up himself within his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice the Lamb within but not the Lamb without the High-Priest within is the Propitiation and his blood as shed within which is the Life and the Life is the Light within as he hath both printed and preached is that Propitiation And certainly did he mean that Faith in the Man Christ without us as he outwardly was crucified was necessary to Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion and that the acknowledgment of Christ as such was necessary to constitute a Christian he would not plead that a meer Just Man who has no Faith in Christ as the Word Incarnate is a Christian and that he who believes in God believes in Christ because Christ is God as he has argued in his address to Protestants And did he really think that to believe and acknowledge Christ to wit as outwardly crucified and raised again to be the Propitiation was the Navel of Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion he would not have excluded that Faith from the absolute necessaries of Religion as he hath plainly done in his discourse concerning the general Rule of Faith and Life Nor would he have set up the Light within every Man with respect to its ordinary discoveries of Moral Piety and Justice without any Revelation of Christ as he came outwardly in the Flesh to be the general Rule of Faith to all Christians as well as to all Heathens which is making Deism and Christianity but one and the same thing tho' now he seems to distinguish them by calling Christianity that Religion whereof the Faith and acknowledgment of Christ the Propitiation is the Navel and Characteristick But seeing W. P. doth so Grosly prevaricate and equivocate about Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such and that it hath been proved he hath not the true Faith of Christ the Propitiation nor so much as a true notion of it 't is fit to apply W. P's words against himself and to Argue from his words by the Rule of contraries As whoever believes in Christ as a