Cunning as well as Unfaithfulness in citing another particular Writer against the Bp. His Cunning and Mr. P. ought to have remembred who lately Printed that amongst his Maxims Cunning Borders upon Knavery in that he never produces his Authors Words And his unfaithfulness in representing the sense widely different if not contrary to what it is Ouzelius in his Notes on Minutius Foelix tells us the Primitive Christians forbore the Heathenish Customs and particularly therefore they rejected the Custom of Crowning their Dead with Garlands This Mr. P. refers to if he refer to any thing to be found in that Author to Justifie the Quakers affecting Dresses different from other Christians of their degree Is there no difference betwixt Idolatrous Rites and the innocent Fashions of Christians ordinary Apparrel But to return to Minutius whereas Coecilius the Heathen had there objected to the Christians that as soon as they saw one another they knew each other Occultis notis insignibus by secret Marks and Signes Octavius the Christian Answers they knew one another onely by their Innocence and Humility not by any Bodily Mark. This the Bp. takes to be rather against the Quakers singularity in Dresses Fashions and Behaviour And as to their Language after all Artifices Mr. P. has not been able to produce which was a pressing point of his Business one Precedent or Shadow of a Testimony that the Primitive Christians used not the ordinary Civilities in their common Discourse and Salutations but affected a different Style or Way by themselves Contrarily he might have remembred that the beloved Disciple being to Write to a Christian Sister of Quality Salutes her by an Inscription To the Elect Lady The next Head worth taking notice is Baptism Touching which the Bp. sincerely professes he Mourns to see Men so hardned as it appears by Mr. Ps. wresting Scripture to elude the Truth he is in this matter Mr. P. first in a manner confesses himself put to his Shifts I am sensible of the disadvantage I am under c. saith he p. 68. yet proceeds he to shift on But to reduce all into as short a compass as may be The Bp. had avouched those words of our LORD Matth. XXVIII 19. to be an Institution and Command of Baptism with Water And gave two substantial reasons which he holds to 1. Baptising with the Holy Ghost said the Bp. was not in the Apostles power Therefore it could not be the thing commanded them 2. Baptising with Water was the Apostles and Primitive Practice and has been ever since the Practice of the Church To the First of these Mr. P. answereth it is not true and to make that good alledges Acts X. 44. While Peter yet spake these words the Holy Ghost fell on all those that heard the word Hence he infers that Peter Baptised Cornelius with the Holy Ghost Now was there ever any thing more impertinent and inconsequent While Peter spake c. the Holy Ghost fell on them c. Therefore which was the Point to be proved was it Peter's Act and in his power to Baptise with the Holy Ghost No The Spirit breatheth where it listeth John III. 8. But GOD says Mr. P. by the Apostles did Baptise Believers with the Holy Ghost Did he so Then 't was GOD Baptised them with the Holy Ghost and not the Apostles They were only instruments at pleasure as long as the Act was not principally theirs it cannot be concluded hence to have been in their power Baptising with the Holy Ghost and with Fire the words Mr. P. alledges p. 69. and runs upon was a special Prerogative of our Lord Christ predicted only of him Matth. IV. 11. and fulfilled only by him Acts II. not by any man ever living The Bps. First Reason then is true But his Second says Mr. P. seems to be defective and short yet all the substance that Mr. P. speaks in 12 or 13 Pages to prove it so is Practice is no Institution Nor was the Bp. so weak as to pretend it is But by Mr. Ps. leave continued Practice in obedience to Command and such Practice allowed urged and re-inforced by the Holy Ghost is a good Explication of the sense of the Institution or of the words of the Command The summ of the Command was Baptise them that Believe The summ of the Practice pursuant is All those that believed wereby the Apostles or Persons Commissionated by them Baptised with Water Yea though they had been before Baptised with the Holy Ghost as the Bp. pleaded from Acts X. 47. Was ever any Institution more clearly evidenced and asserted As to all Mr. Ps. agravating Excursions on this Subject he full well knows the Church of England-men no more allow Water-Baptism to be sufficient to the Salvation of adult persons without the New Creature or Baptism of the Spirit then he does But some Persons have the faculty to be blind when they list to contradict and accuse even against their own Sense Thus as to what Mr. P. has Replyed touching Baptism As to the Lords-Supper that stands upon the same unmoveable Foundation with Baptism viz. our LORD's Institution and the continued Universal Practice of the Church To what the Bp. had mentioned of the first of these Mr. P. excepts in these words The Bp. will have this Supper Four times repeated in the Scripture of the New Testament besides that of the Apostle Paul which must be his mistake Whereto the Bp. says To report his words thus is not Mr. Ps. mistake but in all appearance his wilful prevarication The Bp. said no Command could be more express then that touching the Outward use of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper Four times repeated namely the Command in the New Testament and that St. Paul adds as a reason of the Command and Argument for its Observation it is a shewing forth the LORD's Death till he came All this being undeniable Mr. P. that he might have something to except against was forced to misreport the Bps. words Is there not a vast difference betwixt rhese two Assertions This Supper was Four times repeated and the Command for this Supper is Four times repeated or recorded in the New Testament Which last was most evidently the Bps. sense But having to his Credulous Readers that is his own Party convinced in his way that is charged the Bp. of a mistake he proceeds to what is more dangerous plainly to diffuse his Poison This coming of CHRIST was Spiritual and the words may reasonably be Read he means Paraphrased thus Eat this Supper of outward Bread and Wine till I come and Sup with you and be your Supper that am the Bread and Wine from Heaven c. By Mr. Ps. favour the Scripture no where styleth CHRIST Wine from Heaven In respect of the Union of the Saints with him he is styled a Vine and his Grace or Spirit in respect of its indeficiency Water and Living Water but no where Wine This a fetch of Mr. Ps. who
them who professes as concerning their Principles he was deceived by them thinking they had held sincerely the Principles which by a more diligent search he finds they hold not assures us and has Printed Testimonies out of their Books to prove they deny 1. Faith in Christ as George Keith in his Third Narrative he outwardly suffered at Jerusalem as he rose again Ascended and now Sits at the Right Hand of God to be necessary to Salvation 2. Justification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed 3. A Resurrection of the Body that Dyeth 4. Christs coming again without us in his glorified Body to Judge the Quick and the Dead Nay the same Person professes as the Bp. has seen under his hand That he really thinks he can prove W. P. holds not one of the Articles of the Christian Creed soundly and intirely and that none ever more plainly oppugned the Doctrine of the Scriptures than W. P. and his Party Upon so close an Evidence as this is let the World judge if the Bp. be unreasonable in demanding a better confession of Faith than by meer Innuendo's as necessary to their being allowed Christians True indeed now in his Defence Mr. P. tells the World he and his Brethren receive all the Articles of the Creed called the Apostles p. 97. But this may be reckoned one of the good effects the Bps Paper has had to bring them to this acknowledgment and t is to be hoped they will be kept to it It would be as endless as needless and besides would swell this Paper to too great a Bulk to follow Mr. P. Page by Page to the End Replying to all his little Cavils and poor Evasions A more Compendious way therefore must be taken Which shall be 1. By reducing Mr. P s Answers and Arguments to some Common Heads or Figures of Speech which he uses so contemptible in themselves as that the instances of them are answered by being shewn And 2. by singling out the more material Points wherein Mr. P. Enlarges and setting them in their true Light The several Heads to which his Answers may be reduced are either manifest Impieties or manifold arts of Uncharitableness and Disingenuity much unbecoming a Christian or even a fair Disputant Manifest Impieties are 1. His falsifying the sense of Scripture and then the words of it so plainly that he cannot well seem insensible of it himself Thus whereas our LORD said John III. 20. Every one that doeth evil hateth the light neither cometh to the light lest his deeds should be reproved Which passage to make look favourably to his purpose he corrupts the 21st verse and reads it thus He that loves the Light brings his Deeds to the Light to see if they are wrought in GOD. p. 10. 4. Whereas the plain meaning of the Text is no more than They that do evil seek to be hid 1 Thes 5. 7. They that are Drunken are Drunken in the Night They who do well fear not to be seen To which sense every Nation has Proverbs Si factum est bonum quorsum tenebris opus est and with us Truth seeks not Corners with many like now contrary to the sense of Mankind as well of the Holy Ghost W. P. produces this Text as a proof of the Light within and that it is to be the Rule and Judge of our Life and Deeds yea to credit confirm and expound Scripture So does he too with like reasonableness Eph. V. 11 12 13. 2. His plain reproaching the Holy Spirit in the Apostles as to what they taught Thus when he had no other way to answer the Bps Argument for the Divine Authority of Baptism by Water taken from Acts X. 47. 48. he says plainly In all which Peter seems more concerned to save his own credit than to recommend or establish Water-Baptism p. 81. A man would think this were not expressing himself reverently on this tender point or as he promised p. 68. These for a Tast Single instances under each Head for brevity sake must suffice Manifold Arts of Uncharitableness and Disingenuity the Bp. accounts these that follow 1. Calumnious and Spiteful Insinuations as p. 30. that he the Bp. believes not the Thirty Nine Articles yet did W. P. never discourse with him touching any one of them with many like passages 2. False Imputations p. 69. He downright charges the Bp. for treating the Quakers with Levity and Scorn as to the Language Thou and Thee The Bp. Challenges him to shew a light or scornful Expression in that his Paper Nay rather than fail W. P. will impute to the Bp. his own uncharitable censures of him The Bishop according to his usual way of plain dealing and speaking home to mens Consciences to the end they may search their Hearts touching their secret and unseen sins which are known only to God and their own Consciences dealt roundly with the Quakers and put some Questions to them conjuring them to put them to themselves and Examine their own Conscience For instance the Bp. has long observed and all Men may observe as Notorious the Quakers eager pursuit of wealth and their effectual wily and secret ways of getting it Now hereupon he bids them Examine their Consciences Whether their main end and study by their pretended Mortifications and renouncing the World be not to enrich themselves and to make themselves a party considerable c. This Mr. P. makes one of the Bps. censures and then charges it upon the Bp. as the worst construction that the most irreligious and profane could make of their behaviour The Bp. did not affix it to them and all along avows that he suspends any Censure or Judgment of them He professes it is not his right in this sense to judge But he now demands of Mr. P. whether when Peoples Actions are suspicious it be not reasonable for nay the Duty of a faithful Pastor to conjure them to examine and judge themselves which is all the Bp. did Yet still Mr. P. goes on in this false imputation p. 117. The Bp. says he tells us he will not judg us yet his whole Paper is one continued Judgment of us Sure Mr. P. does not know or will not attend what judging as it means censoriousness is The Bp. most plainly judged not the Quakers Belief in their Consciences but that Form which Mr. P. and his Brethren professed or to use their own term declared in this Paper And the Bp. stands to it both the Authors and the Paper deserve another kind of Censure then he gave or attempted on Either Notwithstanding Mr. P. sticks not upon this very reason to charge the Bp. of Irreligion making them as bad as bad can be c. p. 117. God give Mr. P. more Charity and Reason for this is plain censoriousness and concluding without consequence 3 Sly Jeers p. 27. I would have my Reader reflect on this though he were as big as a Bp. p. 40. No Bp. in these three Kingdoms has the big and
scornful look or deportment of Mr. P. especially when he is in the humour of it The Bps. Hell he keeps the true Hell to himself God deliver Mr. P. from it But let him answer how the Bp. could more clearly have Exprest Hell then by Eternity of Torments the Term there used by the Bp. and declined by Mr. P. and his Brethren 4. Wilfully false Constructions of and overlooking the Bps. sense Tergiversations shifting pittiful Evasions c. For instance The Bp. had said they do not in their Paper own the Son of God to be so much as JESUS the great Saviour who delivereth from the wrath to come or the CHRIST the great Prophet Priest Lord and King of the Church Mr. P. answers they several times call him CHRIST admires at the Bps. palpable mistake Does W. P. then know no difference betwixt CHRIST and the CHRIST betwixt calling a Person by his Name and acknowledging his Authority Office and Benefits Again the Bp. requires them to Embrace and profess the intire Christian Faith in the points wherein he has shewn them defective that is as he proved in above two thirds of the Creed W. P. answers It would have become the Bp. to have told them what he would have them believe p. 38. Could the Bp. have spoke plainer then he does when he names the Articles of the Creed which Mr. P. say's he holds therefore knows 5. Inconsequent and trifling Inferences such are p. 31. We call him the beloved Son of God the only begotten of the Father Therefore conceived of the Holy Ghost Mr. P. knows Solomon was named JEDIDIAH the Lords beloved David said to be his begotten Son Ps 2. His first born Ps 89. 27. Yet neither conceived of the Holy Ghost nor born of a Virgin Again in the same page He that confesses him made Flesh confesses him made Flesh by God and therefore made holy Flesh Does not all the World know that all Flesh is made by God and do we hence conclude all Flesh is Holy or conceived by the Holy Ghost Many more may be instanced 6. Contemptuous and scornful language Such is that reflexion p. 61. A Weak-head But let Mr. P. scorn the Bp. as much as he pleases he must know that for Men to Affect non-sensical language and pretend Conscience therein and make it a mark of Godliness and Holyness above others the thing taxed by the weak Bp. is when considered a wicked kind of weakness or voluntary making fools of Mens selves together with an abuse of Religion not to be endured it was therefore no weakness in the Bp. to tax it but a gross one and more then weakness in W. P. to defend it To these may be added his Censures all along savouring of nothing but the heighth of spiritual Pride and Uncharitableness As the Bp feels no share in Christ the glorious Light of Men p. 47. He wants Acquaintance with the Spirit of God in his worship c. ◠these and the like Mr. P. must account for one day God alone can judge in this case To trouble a Mans self to wipe off such dirt as this would be almost as mean an Employment as to cast it 'T will fall off of its own accord To wave therefore all these and many other Heads of Mr. Ps unhandsome dealing which are only a disadvantage to his cause and himself to his cause that needs such a defence and himself that could find no better the main part in his whole Defence that threaten doing hurt are what he has of the Light within of the Sacraments and of that great point of Difference betwixt the Quakers and the Establish'd Church As to the first of these the Bp. did say and still stands to it he knows not what to make of the Quakers Light within But as to the true Divine Light or the Holy Ghost convincing People by the Holy Scripture applied to Conscience of Sin of Righteousness and of Judgment to come the Bp. acknowledges it and blesseth God for his share thereof Notwithstanding he cannot yet perceive the Quakers or Mr. P. himself know what they mean by Their Light Mr. P. is a Man that had Academic Education as he himself told the Bp. and he often pretends to Logic and the Art of Disputing Now from such a Person when the meaning of a Term was demanded some regular definition or explication of it might have been expected The Bp. had made four the most rational Constructions and Conjectures he could devise of what they should mean thereby And distinctly propounded these to have drawn out from Mr. P. a distincter and more definitive sense In stead thereof Mr. P. rejects all with scorn and vile insinuations and only heaps up phrases and words darker and of more difficulty and uncertainty than the Term it self For their farther meaning referring to Barclay's Book The Bp. must tell Mr. P. that his Brother Barclay is guilty of the very self-same unintelligible Banter or if that Term pleases not Cant on this head with himself and no rational Man alive can make sense of what he has writ thereon it being more contradictious and inconsistent than Mr. Ps account He in his V. Proposition which is touching this Light first plainly perverts the Holy Scripture adding expresly a new Term thereto that he may prove Christ given as a Light to all For he reads John III. 16. thus God so loved the World that he hath given his only Son a LIGHT that whosoever believeth in him should be saved As if either the Word a Light were in the Text or Christ being a Light only would have saved Men without his suffering for sin to which that Verse particularly refers as its immediate connexion with Vers 14 15. shews Then he misapplies two or three other Texts to prove this Light Universal And in his Discourse on this Proposition § 16. thus describes it We understand not saith he his 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 called the new Creature the new Man in the Heart Yet this he tells us in his V. Proposition above mentioned is the Purchase of Christs death for every Man Lightening the Hearts of all in a day And he adds in his VI. that the Knowledge of Christ's Death and Sufferings as declared in Scripture is not absolutely necessary for making People partakers of this Light and that they have erred who have taught it is He goes on and proves it after his way § 14. to be a Substance not an Accident because it subsists the Bp. by the way does not think this to be Scripture-Language such wherein as Mr. P. says they always teach it subsists he says in the Hearts of wicked Men even whilst they are in their wickedness Then of their feeling it yea anon tasting smelling seeing it handling by vertue