Scripture which is no ways agreeable to the Sence and Interpretations of any Orthodox Christians p. 43. Which is as undue a Reflection as 't is uncharitably Censorious And what he quotes against our Sence out of W. Penn's Arguments against such a Carnal Resurrection of Man's Carnal or Natural Body as some imagine out of his Reason against Railing p. 134. is no proof at all That our Sence of Holy Scripture in this case is no ways agreeable to the Sence and Interpretation of any Orthodox Christians unless he can either prove the same Natural Carnal and Numerical Body that now is to be the Resurrection Body or the Apostle Paul Heterodox in asserting it a Spiritual Body for a Natural Body is sown a Spiritual Body is raised and that was not first which is Spiritual but that which is Natural and afterward that which is Spiritual 1 Cor. 15. 46. ver 37. and our Sence clearly agrees with this His other Instance to disprove our Sence herein if rightly cited is out of Thomas Ellwood's Answer to G. Keith's First Narrative p. 149. printed 1696. In 1 Cor. 15. 37. he makes the Apostle thus speak saith he The Body that shall arise is not the same Carnal Body that dies No the Body that is sown is a Natural Body but the Body that is raised is a Spiritual Body it is sown a Natural Body it is raised a Spiritual Body ver 44. And that none might think this Spiritual Body was the same with the Natural Body he adds quoth the Priest there is a Natural Body and there is a Spiritual Body He does not say quoth he the Natural Body is made a Spiritual Body or the Natural Body and the Spiritual Body is but one and the same Body but he sets them in opposition as two distinct Bodies and again that none might think this Spiritual Body was the same he adds There is a Natural Body and there is a Spiritual Body p. 27. Thus far the Rector This Addition as he counts it and repeats twice over against Tho. Ellwood to make him an Offender is the express words of the Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 15. 44. There is a Natural Body and there is a Spiritual Body Thus the Apostle uses the same distinction between the Natural Body and the Spiritual Body Where does he say They are both one and the same Body And farther to evince the distinction Paul adds And so it is written The first Man Adam was made a living Soul the last Adam was made a quickning Spirit Howbeit that was not first which is Spiritual but that which is Natural and afterward that which is Spiritual ver 45 46. Now I ask these Men 1st If the first Adam and the last Adam were one and the same Adam 2. If the Spiritual Body and the Natural Body be one and the same Numerical Body And 3. If the Celestial Bodies and the Bodies Terrestrial be one and the same Bodies see ver 40. and ver 37. And thou sowest not that Body that shall be Whom shall we believe in this case the Apostle or this Priest for they differ herein the one says Thou sowest not that Body that shall be and the other 'T is the same Body that shall be The one says Flesh and Blood cannot Inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 15. 50. The other I presume upon his Principle says The same Carnal Body i. e. of Flesh and Blood can and shall Inherit the Kingdom of God But then how agrees his Notion herein with his Beloved Friend their Assistant Geo. Keith his affirming The Husk or drossy part that is no more the true Body than dross in a lump of Rich Ore of Gold is Gold as in his Gross Error and Hypocrisie detected p. 13. And what he means by the Husk or drossy part may be gathered from his affirming concerning the Body of Christ that was Crucified that It is so wonderfully changed as to the Mode and Manner of its being that it is no more a Body of Flesh Blood and Bones but a pure Ethereal or heavenly Body like unto which the Bodies of the Saints are to be at the Resurrection See G. Keith's Way Cast up p. 131 132. 1676. So that the Flesh Blood and Bones the Saints now have must be the Husk or drossy part which they shall not have in the Resurrection but pure Ethereal or heavenly Bodies like Christ's glorious Body And if so 1st How shall they remain one and the same in Substance or Essence they now are 2. How shall they be the same in Substance without Flesh Blood and Bones 3. What shall be their Substance or Essence when they shall be no more Bodies of Flesh Blood and Bones 4. How will this Priest and G. K. reconcile themselves in this Point of the Sameness of Bodies If one affirm the Resurrection Bodies shall be the same Flesh Blood and Bones or at least the same Flesh and Bones they now are and the other they shall be the same in Substance but no more Bodies of Flesh Blood and Bones Let them reconcile and demonstrate the same we are satisfied with the Appointment and good Pleasure of God in this weighty Matter and to wait upon him in the hope of the Resurrection of the Just unto Eternal Life and Glory sincerely believing that God will give a Body as it pleaseth him and to every Seed his own proper Body 1 Cor 15. 38. And do not think it necessary to Faith and Salvation to be too curious or inquisitive as to the very Mode or Manner of the Resurrection Bodies and How God will manifest his Pleasure therein Let 's live well here and it shall be well with us hereafter say to the Righteous it shall be well with them but Woe to the Wicked it shall be ill with them Isa. 30. 10 11. I refer the Ingenuous Reader to several further Answers in this Great Point of the Resurrection i. e. My Antidote against the Venom of the Snake in the Grass p. 102 to 111. And to the Christian Quaker printed 1674. Part II. p. 316 to 167. p. 168 to 173. where also Dr. H. Moor is largely cited on the same subject in his Modest Enquiry into the Mystery of Iniquity and Search into the Nature of a Glorified Body And as to what 's objected against R. Hubberthorn who was both a very Innocent Gifted and Knowing Man if rightly quoted his owning the Glorified Saints in Heaven to be in a State of Perfection and as having received the Redemption of the Body i. e. from the Bondage of Corruption and Sin even before they came thither This no ways contradicts our sincere Belief and Confession Of the Doctrine of the Resurrection from the Dead according to Holy Scripture Heb. 6. As to what is objected against G. W's Questions Is it i. e. the Glory of God visible to the Carnal Eye And of Christ's coming therein c. p. 46. I would ask this Rector Doest thou expect to see
Legal Dispensation had no Faith in the Messiah or no Title to Christianity or were in no Christian State as implied page 4. seeing they had the Word of Faith in them as well as the Law without them Deut. 30. 12 14. compared with Rom. 10. 8. And all Israel drank of the same Spiritual Rock which followed them or went with them and that Rock was Christ 1 Cor. 10. 4. How could they drink thereof if they had no Faith therein 2. Now how this Reason describes a Christian in the Affirmative He tells us To entitle a Man to be a Christian viz. He must necessarily believe Christ to be already come nay that particular and numerical Man Christ Jesus who was born of the Virgin Mary and was of the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh to be the Christ of God that was promised to come in due time That this very Man was Crucified died and rose again from the Dead and is ascended c. citing 1 Tim. 3. 16. This Christ God-man as come and Crucified was that main Foundation of the Gospel and Christianity These were new Articles founded upon a new Dispensation without the Belief of which not to name some others which may be thought by some also necessary such as Baptism by Water and the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper by Bread and Wine a Man cannot be called a Christian page 4 5. If this Belief of the Blessed Man Christ Jesus his Birth Death Resurrection and Ascension into Glory as the Great Mystery of Godliness God manifest in the Flesh c. 1 Tim. 3. 16. be necessary to entitle a Man to be a Christian then we the People called Quakers sincerely believe all this of Christ the true and promised Messiah we really have all this Faith of and concerning him consequently we must have a true Title and right Claim to Christianity by the same Proposition we really believe both of Christ and in him even in his Name and Power wherein we hold the main Foundation of the Gospel and Christianity and the Doctrine thereof But this Rector has omitted a Living Faith in Christ unto Repentance Sanctification Regeneration the New Birth Newness of Life Purity and Holiness without which no Man shall see God or be a Christian in Nature The more uncharitable and inconsistent then is this Rector in charging us with Venom giving our Doctrine the Character of The Venom of Quakerism and the Quakers indefinitely that of Deceitful Workers Transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ cannot be looked upon any otherwise at best than good moral Heathens and many of them short of that page 5. Hence observe how uncharitable and furious this Rector is and how he had need to be corrected for his Rashness herein though our Profession taking the words thereof in their common Acceptation must be granted at least to seem Orthodox as he grants both of our Paper observed by him i. e. The Christianity c. W. P' s Key John Crook ' s Principles c. But still in his uncharitable and sower Humour he will presume to be Judge over our Sincerity from my seeing cause to construe my Friend's words and Intentions as if we were hence to be mistrusted in our Orthodox Confessions whereupon he presently passes Judgment against the Quakers viz. That they have a nauseous Pill to give you but that it may not be distastful they gild it over as the Writers of Popery in the late K. J's Reign the other day did with more such bitter envious Stuff and false Judgment to which we shall never submit nor give away our Sincerity or Holy Profession of Christ and Christianity which he cannot deny to be Orthodox in it self Nor extinguish our Sincerity therein but only strive to cloud by Reproaches groundless Jealousies and Misconstructions and Perversions which is not as he would be done by to be sure But if a Belief of Christ already come born of the Virgin Mary being of the Seed of Abraham and that he was Crucified died rose again and ascended as the Scriptures declare be sufficient to entitle a Man to be a Christian How many do believe and confess thus much of Christ and yet Unsanctified Unregenerate Impenitent Ungodly and Unchristian in Spirit and Conversation So that they are not in the true living Faith in Christ Jesus though they have an Historical and Traditional one and perhaps may be Baptized or Sprinkled with Water too But of that the Rector here writes somewhat faintly and dubiously as thought by some also necessary i. e. to make a Man a Christian page 9. But afterward he is more positive in this Point That 't is necessary as the Sacred Ordinance of Christ and Saving p. 27. Necessary to enter Men into the Kingdom of God from John 3. 5. p. 28. for Remission and doing away Sins cleansing of our Souls that the Spirit doth Sanctifie the Waters in Baptism to the mystical Washing away of Sin p. 29 31 32. But as for Infants partaking thereof he evades proof It is not his business here to prove he saith p. 27. So that he both evades defending their own Practice and leaves People at an uncertainty of the Subjects of this ignorantly supposed Saving Soul cleansing and mystical washing Ordinance making use of the Anabaptists Arguments for Baptizing Believers with Water which is no proof for Rantism or Sprinkling upon Infants Thus he attempts to shew People the way or means of Regeneration and entering into the Kingdom of God and he lays the stress thereof upon the outward Baptism by Water and not upon the inward Baptism of the Spirit he has found out an easie way to make Christians and to get to Heaven at this rate His business here being to prove Whether outward Baptism by Water is the Sacred Ordinance of Christ as necessary to be believed and Saving or Inward Baptism i. e. the Washing or Cleansing of the Heart or an Inward Conversion to God p. 27. So that by this the Saving Baptism must be the one or the other he places it upon the outward Waters of Baptism as necessary to the cleansing of our Souls mystical Washing away of Sin p. 31 32. therefore not upon the Inward Baptism of the Spirit for that was not sufficient he saith p. 29. No What was it good for then He tells us The inward Baptism was but a necessary Qualification for the Reception of the outward Baptism by Water p. 29. So that the Water is exalted above the Spirit or the Spirit 's Baptism But how many Infants who are Sprinkled can they prove are thus first qualified by the Inward Baptism of the Spirit What confused and bewildred work do we meet withal from some angry Opposers Upon the whole the Man's Definition of a Christian is summed up in this viz. That the Washing of Regeneration by the Word of Life the Inward and Spiritual Baptism is not Saving or sufficient to make a true Christian but Water-Baptism and whether that must be of
like unto which his Body the Church shall be fashioned saying That Affliction did still attend these Members of Christ's Body and that this Body i. e. the Church though not free as yet from suffering Afflictions yet shall be fashioned like to his glorious Body J. C ' s p. 332. So that he owned Christ to have a glorious Body above that of his Members Therefore it appears neither from hence nor yet from this Rector's unjust Charge or false Quotation that the Quakers deny the Mediator the Man Christ Jesus as he falsly saith much less that they do Scornfully Contemn the Blood of Christ p. 23. as they are grosly Calumniated and Slandered What he cites against E. B. and W. P. p. 23 24. is answered in the foregoing Examination And as to Christ's Prophetick Office we are satisfied that we own it more than these our Adversaries in that we believe we ought to hear him in all things by his Light Word and Spirit in our Hearts for which they so much slight and contemn us opposing his Immediate Revelation Teaching and Ministry in these days and confining his present Ministry to the Scriptures in opposition to his Light and Immediate Teaching in Man for though Christ did frequently preach from Scriptures yet his Preaching was with Power and Efficacy he had power both to open the Scriptures and the Understandings of them that heard him in opening them and also so to touch their Hearts that they said Did not our Hearts burn within us while he spoke unto us Which Mens meer literal Preaching cannot do nor work those Effects We are to hear Christ in all things him that speaketh from Heaven but saith the Rector they i. e. the Quakers neither do nor will hear him no their Christ within which they are obliged to tells them other things than our outward Christ or Prophet does p. 24. What an Ignorant and Scornful Reflection and Abuse is this as if either we owned another Christ within than the true Christ and Prophet whom we are to hear which is a false Insinuation or else that Christ as within and Christ as without is not one and the same Christ which is false also neither is Christ divided though he be both without and within And where proves this Rector that the Scripture is the Touch-stone to try Spirits withal wherein he takes part with Mat. Caffin the Anabaptist Preacher his affirming the same against the Quakers p. 25. Christ said Have Salt in your selves and discerning of Spirits was the Gift of the Spirit without which none can truly understand or make use of the Scripture If Tho. Lawson said The Scripture is not the Tryer of Spirits as 't is alledged against us p. 25. I find no Scripture produced to prove this Erroneous Christ is the Great Judge and Tryer of Spirits who searches and tryes the Heart and the Reines and it is by his Light and Spirit that Spirits must be tryed and judged not by the Carnal but by the Spiritual Man And what the Rector again cites out of p. 7. against studying to raise a living thing out of a dead and the Spirit out of the Letter c. was never intended to oppose the Teaching of Christ's Prophetick Office for his Office never allowed any such Study Neither do the Quakers deny Christ's Gospel Ordinances which are really such and by him perpetuated Here the Rector imposes upon us and his Allegations fall short of proof And our not continuing under a Literal and Shadowy Dispensation of Types and Figures carnal Ordinances and outward Element but under a Spiritual Ministry is rather an Indication of our owning Christ's Offices his Gospel his Ministry or Dispensation than any refusing to hear him who speaketh from Heaven by his Holy Spirit Light and Grace in Mens Hearts What seems most materially objected hitherto in the Rector's Antidote being answered I may take notice of some Passages hereafter farther to shew what he falsly deems Venom of Quakerism according to his Title and Observations against our Profession Quest. Do you believe or own Baptism as Essential to Christianity or necessary to Salvation and for the ingrafting us into Christ and his Church Our answer is We believe and are fully perswaded That Baptism which is Essential to Christianity and the Saving Baptism or the Cause without which none can be true Christians or Saved is the Inward or Spiritual Washing of Regeneration by the Word of Life This is the Saving Baptism into Christ and his Church which produceth the Answer of a good Conscience towards God of which the outward was a Figure 1 Pet. 3. 21. This is that One Baptism of Christ by One Spirit into that One Body whereof Christ is the Head As to Dipping or Sprinkling Infants or young Children we find no Precept or President in Holy Scripture for the Practice thereof and therefore we cannot think our not-believing it Essential or necessary to Salvation or making Christians a sufficient Argument to prove us no Christians unless it can be proved that none are Saved without it and that all are Saved that have it Considering also what 's positively affirmed in the 39 Articles as in the sixth Article That whatsoever is not read in the Holy Scriptures nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation And in the 20th Article That the Church ought not to decree or enforce any thing against or besides Holy Writ to be believed for necessity of Salvation And in Article 21 That things ordained by General Councils as necessary to Salvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless that they be taken out of Holy Scripture On the first part of this Profession the Rector makes this Observation against us viz. By this their Answer they i. e. the Quakers do not Insinuate to but plainly tell the World what Baptism it is that is essentially necessary to Salvation or making Christians that is the Inward or Spiritual Washing of Regeneration by the Word of Life the Washing or Cleansing of the Heart or an Inward Conversion to God p. 26 27. And herein we plainly tell the World the plain Truth according to Holy Scripture And what Venom is in this pray Had not this Rector need to be severely corrected for opposing this Doctrine as Venomous and making the outward Baptism by Water the Saving Baptism and not the Inward and Spiritual As if all the World of Mankind were in a State of Damnation who are not so outwardly Baptized with Water or could be no Christians nor Saved if they be not so Baptized or Rantized as he would have them this is like Dip or Damn Oh! uncharitable and unchristian Doctrine Has Salvation by Grace been preached so long among us and must it now be placed on Works or on such a superficial Work as that of outward Baptism Sprinkling Dipping or Plunging Persons in Water But
that the Inward Spiritual Baptism washing of Regeneration by the Word of Life the Spirit of Life the Power of Christ is the Saving Baptism the truly Regenerating Baptism the Baptism essentially necessary to Salvation and making Christians and not the outward nor the Sign Type or Shadow thereof is no venomous Doctrine but agreeable to Holy Scripture Testimony is evident from Isa. 1. Wash you make you clean put away the evil of your doings from before mine Eyes saith the Lord c. this was an Inward and Spiritual Washing Jer. 4. 14. O Jerusalem wash thine Heart from thy wickedness that thou mayest be saved This was a Heart-washing an Inward and Spiritual Washing whereby they might be Saved Zech. 13. 1. The Fountain opened to the House of David and to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem for Sin and for Uncleanness was a Spiritual Fountain The Lord God was the Fountain of Living Water which when they had forsaken they committed a great Evil therein as well as in hewing to themselves broken Cisterns which could hold no Water Jer. 2. 13. And the clean Water the Lord promised to Sprinkle upon his People to make them clean from all their Filthiness and to cleanse them from all their Idols Ezek. 36. 25. was a Spiritual Sprinkling with Spiritual Water and the Lord 's doing John 3. 5. Except a Man be born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God This was Spiritual Living Water Inward and Sanctifying Grace as the True Primitive Christians experienced and best of Reformed Protestants believed and not the outward Element of Water as Papists and this Rector believe and hold As in his page 28 before more fully observed yea he holds This poor Element as he calls it of Water as necessary to do away Sins and to work upon our Souls as the Waters of Jordan were to the Cleansing of Naaman 2 Kings 5. 13. so necessary quoth he are the Waters of Baptism to the Cleansing our Souls p. 31. Such Vertue he ascribes to this Element thus idolizing it even as highly as the Rhemists against the Protestants but contrary to Christ's own Testimony also If I wash thee not thou hast no part with me saith our Lord Jesus John 13. 8. who also required first to make clean the inside that the out-side might be clean also Therefore 't was the Inward Spiritual Washing of Regeneration the Washing or Cleansing of the Heart by the Word of Life the Holy Spirit and Power of Christ which was the Soul's Saving Baptism and not that of the outward Element Titus 3. 4 5. After that the Kindness of God our Saviour toward Man appeared not by Works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his Mercy he Saved us by the Washing of Regeneration and Renewing of the Holy Ghost And if the Baptism which doth now save us be not the Putting away of the filth of the Flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ according to that of 1 Pet. 3. 23. What can be more clear than that the Saving Baptism is that of the Spirit which is the One Baptism Ephes. 4. 5. whereby the Saints were all Baptized into One Body 1 Cor. 12. 13. and not that of the outward Element which can neither cleanse the Soul nor wash away the Sin or Guilt thereof The Inward and Spiritual Grace Saveth the Soul from Sin and Condemnation and ought to be preferred to all outward and visible Signs which can neither Save nor Sustain or Relieve the Soul 't is Life and Substance which is divine can do that The One Spiritual Baptism and that One Bread that Spiritual Meat and Drink which cometh down from Heaven is that which both saves and nourisheth the Soul unto Eternal Life John 6. 1 Cor. 10. That Disciples and Apostles of Christ did Baptize with Water is not denied Acts 8. 36 38. ch 10. 48. ch 19. 3 4 5. but that they did Practice or enjoin it as an act of necessity pursuant to Christ's Commission in Matth. 28. 19. is to impose upon us or beg the Question but that it was rather permissively practised in con discention than by that Commission For 1st Water is not expressed in that Text. 2dly When they Baptized with Water they did not use the terms of the Commission in it We do not read in all the Acts of the Apostles that any of them Baptized with Water in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost or that they used those expressions or terms in their Baptizing with Water but in the name of the Lord or in the name of the Lord Jesus If Water had been intended in that Commission of Christ Matth. 28. 19. the Apostle Paul must be concerned in it it must be as much binding to him as any other Minister but he declares the contrary that Christ sent him not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel 1 Cor. 1. 17. he does not say Christ sent me not only to Baptize but positively for Christ sent me not to Baptize but to preach the Gospel which was part of the Reason he gave why he thanked God that he had baptized no more than those he mentions 1 Cor. 1. 14 15 16. as well as Lest they should have said he had baptized in his own name for 't is not to be supposed he would thank God for not performing part of his Commission if it had been to Baptize with Water as well as to Preach the Gospel but that positive and general Reason for Christ sent me not to Baptize but to preach the Gospel leaves no room for him to say Christ sent me to Minister Water-Baptism in his Commission in Matth. 28. 19. for Water-Baptism was properly John's Baptism and Ministry to make way for Christ's higher Dispensation and Spiritual Ministry Matth. 3. 11. Mark 11. 8. Luke 3. 16. John 1. 16. Acts 1. 5. 10. 16. compare with Acts 19. 2 3 4. But I need not enlarge on this subject to answer the Anabaptists Argument for Plunging or dipping Believers in Water unless this Rector were in the Practice thereof and renounced his Rantism as they do as a Scriptureless Thing as they term Sprinkling Infants But referr him to a Treatise of one that was of his Coat i. e. William Dell his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or The Doctrine of Baptisms To the Rector's Referring the Reader to that Excellent Piece of Water-Baptism as he terms it writ by that worthy and Ingenious Author as he applauds him of The Snake in the Grass c. printed 1697. p. 29. Thus highly has he commended the Author of that Great Defaming and Reproaching Libel i. e. The Snake in the Grass but it would be too difficult a Task for him to defend the manifold Gross and Abominable Lies and Calumnies contain'd therein against the manifest detection and discovery made of them not only in my Antidote against the Venom of
Typical though Consecrated We are sure no real Protestants do deny them to be Typical or Figurative but have affirm'd them so to be And whether the Supper of the Lord or Christ's Last Supper in the Type Luke 22. was made up only of the Bread broken and the Cup is a Question to be considered by them who assert it or whether the Passover was not principally concern'd in the Supper seeing that also after Supper Christ took the Cup and gave them I deny that the Bread and the Wine only as now ministred by Priests is either properly a Supper or a Dinner How then come they to call it The Supper of the Lord Or deny it to be a Type or Figure by deeming us Horrid Impostors for asserting the outward Supper to be Typical 'T is true it 's said As oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come 1 Cor. 11. 26. I hope our Adversary will not make As oft to import a Command and that perpetual too unless till he Christ come can import a perpetual Delay of his Coming And though Christ's Last Supper wherein he eat the Passover with his Disciples was then pro tempore commanded by him yet this does not prove it his Institution For it was a Legal Institution fulfilled by him as other Legal Rites and Types were before he was offer'd up That Christ as the Bread of Life from Heaven and his Divine Virtue Grace and Spirit as the Fruit of him the heavenly Vine which gives Life Nourishment and Comfort unto the Soul was really the Substance and Mystery typified by the outward Bread and Cup I hope no Spiritual Believer or Christian will deny And to suppose they shall not partake thereof until Christ's Coming at the Resurrection is to suppose their Souls must starve and famish in the mean time which can be no glad Tidings to them The Rector falsly charges us with saying The Resurrection is past already as Hymeneus and Philetus 2 Tim. 2. 18. p. 34. 'T is none of our saying we deny that the Resurrection there spoken of is past or made already or that we overthrow the Faith of any believing therein as it is to come by Christ Jesus who is the Resurrection and the Life and by whom comes the Resurrection of the Dead 1. Cor. 15. And I would ask this Rector where we say or use these Expressions That the Institution of the Lord's Supper was only to continue till that Inward Coming or forming of Christ in our Hearts and for that Reason throw off the outward Supper p. 34 35. Where have we so said or argued For our not using the Type is rather because we do not believe it of Force or Necessity under an higher Dispensation namely that of the New Covenant established by the Death of Christ the Testator who blotted out and nailed the hand-writing of Ordinances to his Cross the Dispensation of the Gospel and New Covenant being a Dispensation of Substance and not of Shadows although they were in some things condescended unto in a State of Infancy when not impos'd as things Essential to Christianity or Salvation It 's true that they who gladly received the Word continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and in breaking of Bread and in Prayers Acts 2. 42. And Verse 46. And they continuing daily with one Accord in the Temple and breaking Bread from House to House did eat their Meat with Gladness and singleness of Heart No doubt they were very Innocent in this Practice Praising God c. v. 47. And this we have often done and believe it is the Duty of all true Christians to eat their Meat with Singleness of Heart and whether they eat or drink to do all to the Glory of God 1 Cor. 10. 31. Col. 3. 17. And what greater Sanction can this Man suppose or place upon what he calls the Lord's Supper Ought we not to praise God for all his Benefits and use them to his Glory daily and not only in a daily Remembrance of Christ and his Love to us but also in a true sense thereof and of his Sanctifying Word In Acts the second quoted it 's also said Verse 44 45. And all that believed were together and had all things common and sold their Possessions and Goods and parted them to all Men as every Man had need Now if our Opposers will make all Examples and Practices binding then why do they not follow this of having all things common and selling their Possessions c. I do not think the Priests now a-days will imitate them or deem themselves bound thereby And where do they so much as imitate those Primitive Believers in breaking Bread from House to House And how will they prove this Breaking of Bread only to be the Lord's Supper I deny that to be made up only of Bread and I cannot suppose this Man will esteem it a sufficient Supper Nor do I find that the Apostles call Believers only breaking Bread from House to House Acts 2. or the Disciples coming together to break Bread Acts 20. 7. the Lord's Supper where they neither mention Wine nor the Passover Nor would it be of good report to say they drank Wine from House to House And if it should be asserted That the Lord's Supper was made up only of breaking Bread would not this gratifie the Popish Priests in giving their Sacrament but in one kind However the outward Bread as broken and the outward Cup as ministred by our Lord Jesus Christ were not only Figurative of his Body and Blood as offer'd upon the Cross but also did Typifie the Saints Eating and Drinking the Body and Blood of Christ Spiritually who saith My Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed And he that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him John 6. And I 'll raise him up at the last day saith Christ. Therefore it 's no Corruption of Scripture nor Imposture to consider the Supper of the Lord in the Figure and in the Substance And as to these other Texts 1 Cor. 10. 15 16 17. Rev. 3. 20. Prov. 9. 4 5. John 6. Matt. 26. 29. Luke 22. 16 29 30. They i. e. the Quakers offer to the view of the World I cannot discern or imagine quoth the Rector to what End and Purpose this is done unless it be to amuse the Reader abuse the Scriptures or confute themselves Page 36 37. Reply It was to none of those Ends these Texts are offer'd but to shew our Consideration of the Lord's Supper in the Substance and Mystery thereof as Typified by the outward that there is a Spiritual Bread and Wine Spiritual Meat and Drink in Christ's Kingdom for the enlivened Soul to eat and drink of and live by which the Visible and Elementary did Typifie and Figure Prov. 9. 5. Wisdom saith Come eat of my Bread and drink of the Wine which I have mingled That this was
within And the Book will be opened in thee he puts IN THEE in Capital Characters as if it were a Crime or Error to own the Lamb of God to have a Throne or Dominion in Man or the Light within to be Judge of every idle Word Which still bespeaks a secret Enmity against the Light and as if the Light were neither to Judge nor to Record Mens Actions in the Book of Mens own Consciences whereas the contrary is evident if they will search and examine their own Consciences and be willing to bring their Deeds to the Light in them that they may be manifest proved and Judged For every one that doeth Truth cometh to the Light and bringeth his Deeds to the Light that They may be manifest that they are wrought in God John 3. And 't is certain that there is a Record made of Mens Iniquities even in their Hearts and Consciences by the true Light as the Sin of Judah was graven upon the Table of their Heart Jer. 17. 1. And without true Repentance it will not be blotted out of that Record but will remain unto the Great Day of Judgment and final Recompence of Rewards when the Books shall all be opened and the Dead Judged out of those things written in the Books every Man according to their Works Rev. 20. So that the Judgment given and the Record made in Mens Consciences by the true Light even in this Life will not wear out nor be made void but remain unto the Last Judgment of the Great Day to come to the great Joy of the Righteous and Shame Contempt and Misery of the Wicked and finally Impenitent who live and die in their Sins As it is testified in Job 21. 30. That the Wicked is reserved to the Day of Destruction they shall be brought forth to the Day of Wrath. And Christ spoke of such as would not receive his Ministers nor hear their Words Verily I say unto you it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgment than for that City Matt. 10. 15. compare with Chap. 11. 22 24. and Mark 6. 11. and Luke 10. 12 14. All which signifie a Day of Judgment to come And as it is appointed unto Men once to die but after this the Judgment Heb. 9. 27. As also the Apostle Peter speaks of the Day of Judgment and Perdition of Ungodly Men 2 Pet. 3. 7. And also 2 Pet. 2. 9. The Lord knoweth how to deliver the Godly out of Temptations and to reserve the Unjust to the Day of Judgment to be punished And Jude v. 6. And the Angels which kept not their first Estate or Principality but left their own Habitation he hath reserved in Everlasting Chains under Darkness unto the Judgment of the Great Day In which Great Day it will fully appear that the Judgment given and the Record made in Mens Consciences by the Light is true and will stand for ever against the Wicked the willful Unbelievers and finally Impenitent And that there is no Opposition nor Contradiction between the present Judgment of Christ in Mens Hearts and Consciences and that which is to come That the Soul of Man though created is Immortal and never dies This we still believe and confess and what the Rector quotes as he supposes against it out of G. F. his Great Mystery and W. Penn's Brief Answer p. 47. if rightly considered and compared will not make void our Belief and Profession which I have answered and explained over and over and so has W. P. by his Distinction between the Breath or Spirit of Life which God breathed into Man and Man himself who thereby became a Living Soul Consequently the Soul of Man is created as well as Man being included in the Being of Man as the more Noble and Spiritual part inspired by the Divine Breath or Spirit of Life whereby Man became a Living Soul And this Distinction is clearly implied in G. F's Great Mystery though unfairly quoted What 's more Explanatory being left out by this Adversary and more fully answered in my aforesaid Examination Entituled Truth and Innocency vindicated c. against the three Norfolk Priests and Bugg p. 7 8 9 60. That we are Sincere in our Profession of Christianity in what is contained in our said little Pamphlet as he calls it entituled The Christianity of the People called Quakers Asserted we are not Conscious to our selves of the contrary nor Convicted of any Insincerity therein by this Rector's or any others Invidious Essays or Attempts nor from any Instances which either he or his Brethren or F. Bugg have produced against us Nor are we Conscious to our selves of holding Tenets or Doctrines which are either directly opposite or contradictory to these he calls New Creeds if impartially cited and truly explained which they have not done in their Invidious Endeavours against us consequently we find no cause to Retract Censure or Condemn the Tenets or Doctrines which we hold and therefore his Charge of Horrid Blasphemies we reject as an odious Calumny proceeding from a Proud Envious Persecuting Spirit which the Lord will Rebuke Neither has he shewn from those Instances against us any such Horrid Blasphemies as he tells of but rather his own Perversions Ignorance and Envy The Lord deliver poor Souls from such Blind Guides that they may not fall into the Ditch with them For some of their Leaders the Priests especially those of them that are of an Envious Persecuting Spirit are the most Blind and Ignorant of the Mystery of Christ and of those things which pertain to his Kingdom FINIS
Infants or Believers we are left at uncertainty by this Rector 't is enough with him to cry It must be with Water Water But who who must come under it Men or Babes Here we are at a loss What an easie way it is to make Christians and to get to Heaven if this be it viz. Learn and believe your Creed and that you are inwardly washed regenerated and entered into God's Kingdom by your Water-Baptism Whether as Infants or grown up is still the Question This Rector boldly tells us Nay further it appears That before our Saviour Baptized those in Judea he represented the Solemnity of Baptism as a thing necessary to enter Men into that Kingdom of God to which he invited them our Saviour not only telling Nicodemus John 3. 5. That except a Man be born again he could not see the Kingdom of God But yet more plainly That except he was born again of Water p. 5. and of the Spirit he could not enter into it p. 28. In this Interpretation of John 3. 5. to outward Water the Rector exactly agrees with the Popish Notion and Interpretation thereof That no Man can enter into the Kingdom of God nor into the Fellowship of Holy Church without Water-Baptism as held by the Rhemists see their Annotations upon John 3. 5. And therein opposed by the Protestants as appears in Dr. Fulk's Answer viz. It is not necessary in this place By Water to understand material Water but rather the Purifying Grace of Christ. As in Chap. 4. ver 11 14. where 't is called Living Water whereof he saith Washing with Water in Baptism is an outward Sign So that the Reform'd Protestants did place Salvation the New Birth and entering into the Kingdom of God upon the Inward Baptism by the Purifying Grace of Christ and not upon the Outward Element of Water they esteem'd that but an outward Sign of the Inward For the outward Baptism by Water the Rector urges our Saviour's Example and Practice from John 3. 22 26. p. 28. as if practised or ministred by Christ himself But that 's a Mistake for in John 4. 2. 't is expresly said Though Jesus himself baptized not but his Disciples I have run the farther into this Point in this place to shew what a Composition the Rector has run Christianity into But to return to some of his invidious Abuses and Perversions For the Credit of his Charge of Venom and Blasphemous Opinions relating to Christianity as well as to the Government against us he saith And to this end and purpose in the Month of March last past there were two Books presented to both Houses of Parliament the one Entitled A Brief Discovery of some of the Blasphemies and Seditious Principles c. The other Entitled Some few of the Quakers many horrid Blasphemies Heresies c. And also a Sheet Entitled Some Reasons humbly offered why the Quakers should be examined p. 6 7. Here we may observe this Rector has owned these same Books as well as presenting them to the Parliament Now one of them that is a Libel stiled Some Few has an Owner with the rest Thou therefore John Meriton Rector so called art accountable for the manifold Abuses Perversions Calumnies and Traducings which are in those Books and detected in my Truth and Innocency vindicated which I doubt not but will turn to your great Shame and Disgrace who promoted them as will also your strenuous Endeavours to Insence the Government against us but that they had more Discretion and Prudence than to be influenced by two or three Invidious Persons against a Peaceable and Serviceable People Now concerning our Christian Profession on which the Rector makes his Observations to evince the Venom of Quakerism as he unjustly defames us He accuseth us with dubious and equivocal Terms agreeable to those of the Oracles of the Heathen p. 7. for our confessing That our Belief is That in the Unity of the God-head there is Father Son and Holy Ghost those Three Divine Witnesses that beare Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and that these Three are One according to Holy Scripture Testimony These the Rector has judged as dubious equivocal Terms though they are Scripture Terms see Matt. 28. 19. 1 John 5. 7. John 14. 26. Chap. 15. 26. But not being content with this our Confession he begs this Question i. e. But if not Three Persons what Three are they page 8. Let him prove these Terms by plain Scripture as we have done ours and then we shall be resolved so as not to charge him with dubious Terms He might have spared his bitter Insinuations against us as virulent Poison grossest Errors equivocal Reserves wherein they meaning the Quakers may be thought to exceed their Brethren the Jesuits page 8. It had been more Prudence for him to have forborne or reserved these bitter Aspersions than to impose them upon the Reader which shews a great Enmity and bitterness of Spirit in the Man His repeated and partial Citations and Charge against G. F. W. P. and G. W. in page 8 9 10. are answered and detected in the second part of the other Examination i. e. Truth and Innocency c. under the first Head and Title Concerning the Holy Trinity What is alledged against G. W. out of Ishmael c. page 10. about the Three Persons though wrongly cited by the Rector p. 9 10. I have positively disowned that passage twice already both as 't is in it self and as it is none of mine and do now a third time disown the same which none therefore but the Implacable will repeat against me About a Heaven within and the Locality of Heaven p. 10. I do not find either G. F. or W. P. truly quoted or cited upon Examination The Matter as it concerns G. F. is answered in the other Examination aforesaid To the Rector's thus construing our Confession i. e. When they speak of Three Divine Witnesses bearing Record in Heaven that is to say quoth he the Heaven within them p. 10. Thus he imposes his meaning upon us as if we confined the Divine Three bearing Witness in Heaven only to a Heaven within us and not as being in that Heaven without us also which is a mistaken Construction for the Heaven wherein the Divine Three bear Witness is above and distinct from the Earth 1 John 5. 7 8. and yet the same Holy Spirit which is God bears witness in Earth too even in Mens Hearts and Consciences His Spirit bears witness with our Spirits c. And he that believeth on the Son of God hath the Witness in himself 1 John 5. 10. And he that inhabiteth Eternity and dwells in the highest Heavens dwells also in the lowest Hearts even with them that are poor and of contrite Spirits and tremble at his word how despised soever they are in the Eyes of the Proud and Envious whom God will debase And it was no lessening of the Blessed Record of the Divine Three
in Heaven for the Spiritual Believers in Christ Jesus to be promoted to the Honour and Priviledge of sitting together in Heavenly places in Christ Jesus Eph. 2. 5 6. and their continuing in the Son and in the Father if the Word which they had heard from the Beginning remained in them 1 John 2. 24. As there is a Plurality of Heavens without us so there are degrees of heavenly States in Christ Jesus within us if our Conversation be in Heaven I charge the Rector with a false Quotation and Abuse of me in particular in his Observation on our Confession to the Divinity and Humanity or Manhood of Jesus Christ. Where he quotes Truth defending the Quakers p. 22. and against me saith Where he affirms Christ's coming in the Flesh to be but a Figure or Example answered in the other Examination part 1. p. 24 25. which are not my words but in the Priest's 35th Question wrongly accusing R. Hubberthorn therewith The Rector also wrongs R. H. and me in what he adds viz. Which is also the Saying of R. Hubberthorn and justified by G. W. in his Judgment Fixed p. 336. who tells you plainly what Man Christ the Quakers own i. e. their Light within only p. 11. He wrongs me again in both For 1st I never understood that 't was R. H's Saying that Christ's coming in the Flesh was But a Figure nor saw it ever so affirmed under his hand but by his Adversaries 2. Neither have I justified that Saying in Judgment Fixed 3. Neither do I there tell you plainly that the Man Christ the Quakers own is their Light within only I do not confine the Christ to within only though he be our Light within as well as he is our Mediator the Man Christ without But the Rector to fasten his Charge upon me adds viz. His words i. e. G. W's are these Therefore the Man Christ Jesus was before he came in the Body of Flesh p. 11. Here the Rector cites a Consequence of a Proposition against me but not the Proposition it self wherein he is unfair Yet the Consequence proves not that I either affirm or justifie Christ's coming in the Flesh to be but a Figure 'T is fully answered in the Examination before and my Proposition from which the said Consequence is drawn is John bore witness of that Man Christ saying He that cometh after me is preferred before me for he was before me John 1. 15. Again ver 30. After me cometh a Man which is preferred before me for he was before me Therefore the Man Christ Jesus was before he came in the Body or Flesh he was that Spiritual Rock which all Israel drank of his Life was the Light of Men from the Beginning and all the Generations of the Righteous did Spiritually partake of the Benefit of Christ as Mediator both before and after his coming in the Flesh they virtually partook of the Sacrifice of the Lamb c. Judgment Fixed p. 336. Now could this be to deny either the Divinity or Manhood of Christ No sure but rather a Confession to both Neither doth it prove our Confession thereunto only a Paint or Varnish to deceive the Hearts of the Simple as this Rector would insinuate though very frowardly and unjustly And That Christ existeth outwardly Bodily without us at God's right hand my Enquiry for Scripture-proof for these words Nature of Christianity page 41. Anno 1671. proves no Insincerity in our Belief of Jesus Christ as he is truly God and Man according as Holy Scripture testifies of him and questioning those Terms was not to deny Christ's real Exaltation in Glory as he is at the right Hand of the Majesty in the Heavens What the Rector quotes against G. F. and W. P. about Christ that was Crucified and his outward Person c. p. 12 13. is answered and explained in the Examination aforesaid What he quotes against W. Smith's Primmer p. 8. printed 1668 i. e. They that are False Ministers preach Christ without Here wants the word Only viz. they preach Christ without Only in opposition to his being within for it was so corrected in the last Edition of his Works What carping and picking work do these Men make against us to make us Offenders for a word We also sincerely confess We believe and expect Salvation and Justification by Jesus Christ his Righteousness Merits and Works here they leave out and not by our own God is not indebted to us for our Deservings but we to him for his Free Grace in Christ Jesus whereby we are Saved through Faith in him not of our selves and by his Grace enabled truly and acceptably to serve and follow him as he requires He is our All in all who worketh all in us that is well pleasing to God To render us Insincere or Contradictory herein the Rector begins with G. W's Light and Life thus quoting him p. 38. viz. The Quakers see no need of directing Men to Jesus Christ or his Blood as it was outwardly shed at Jerusalem for Justification c. Herein he has falsly quoted me and misrepresented my words which if he read them 't was the more wickedly done If it was upon the Credit of another's Information 't was presumptuously foolish so injuriously to cite them My words in the place quoted are these viz. The Quakers see no need of directing Men to the Type for the Antitype viz. neither to the outward Temple nor yet to Jerusalem to Jesus Christ or his Blood It should be for Jesus Christ there knowing that neither the Righteousness of Faith nor the Word of it doth so direct Rom. 10. which is not to disswade People from Jesus Christ where he is to be found but from going to seek him in the Type before mentioned The Matter is answer'd before this Rector had need to be rectified himself Again He quotes G. W. thus p. 55. ibid. Where doth the Scripture say That the shedding of Christ's Blood outwardly was the meritorious cause of Man's Salvation And p. 64. It is False Doctrine to lay the meritorious cause or stress of Justification upon the shedding that Blood let out by the Spear He has here quoted me partially in both these passages especially in the last 1. My Question to the Baptist in the place was this Where do the Scriptures use those Expressions and so much vary about the Blood of Christ as one while to say that the shedding that Blood outwardly was the meritorious cause of Salvation c. p. 55. 2. Whereas the Baptist accused us with denying the shedding of the Blood upon the Cross that was let out by vertue of the Spear being thrust into his side to be the meritorious cause of Man's Justification as held in the Affirmative by the Baptist. My answer was The shedding of that Blood let out by the Spear was an Act of a wicked Man and the Spear an Instrument of Cruelty which to lay the meritorious cause or stress of Justification upon is false Doctrine for