not own the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures Mr Bournes Reply Mr Bourn began to presse other Arguments but Nayler would not hearken but cried stop thy mouth liar liar Then Mr Bourne called to another Question But let any man truly consider the Arguments and see if Naylers mouth was not most fit to be stopped and if Nayler was not the great liar accusing others wrongfully for that of which hee was so justly guilty himselfe Nayler did not then give his answer to the Question in writing but sent it to us the day after the Disputation In which he falsely applieth divers places of Scripture to prove if he could that it is not the Spirit of God speaking in the holy Scriptures but the Spirit in holy men that is the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith I shall only in briefe give some answer to his Allegation of Scripture and some observations by the way and then proceed to the second Question Naylers Allegation 1. The first Scripture Nayler alledgeth is that Exod. 18.16 When they have any matter saith Moses they come to me and I judge between one and another c. Therefore thinks Nayler it is not the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures but the Spirit speaking in men that judgeth To which for answer Reply First I observe with what spirit the Quaker doth agree in this Allegation Cardinalis Bellarmin de judice Controversiarii fidei lib. 3. cap. 3. and this is with the Spirit of Antichrist in Cardinall Bellarmine who brings the selfe same place of Scripture to prove an outward Judge of Controversies of Faith and to bee interpreter of the holy Scripture The Question he proposeth is whether the interpretation of Scripture be to be sought from some one visible common Judge which he affirmeth and endeavours to prove from this Scripture That as Moses did answer to all doubts arising about the Law of God so there must be an outward visible Judge of all Controversies And this is the Church and the Spirit in the Church or in the chiefe Pastor the Pope with his Councill of Pastours saith Bellarmine and the Spirit speaking in holy men saith Nayler that is in himselfe and his fellow Quaker And thus you may see from whom the Quakers received this Doctrine even from the popish seducing Jesuits or some seduced Socinians or other Heretickes who seeke to disgrace the holy Scriptures that they may more easily set forth their owne errours with faire pretences of the spirit But to answer Cardinall Bellarmine and James Nayler both together 1. Moses was an extraordinary man and had an extraordinary measure of the Spirit and yet Moses did not take upon him an infallibility of Spirit and Judgement but did make known to the people the statutes of God and his lawes Thus what God had or did reveale that was the Judge not his own Spirit nor any Spirit in him but the voice of God in his law or Gods own direction to end the Controversie This is evident if you consult these places of Scripture which witnesse what Moses did in the cause of the womans son that cursed God Lev. 24. Lev. 24.11 12 13 14. And about receiving the Passeover by the men that had touched the dead body of a man Num. 6.9 Numb 9.7 8. Numb 32.33 34 15 32. And concerning the man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day Numb 15. he consults with God in all those Thus Moses and holy men before the Law written they enquire of God to know his mind and pleasure and follow that which God taught them But after the Law and word and will of God was written then to the Law and to the Testimony If they speake not according to this it is because they have no light in them Isaiah 8.20 as the Prophet Isaiah doth witnesse 2. Observe what matters they were which Moses did judge they were not matters of Faith but matters of Fact Controversies between man and man he did judge between one and another saith that Text which Nayler himselfe alledgeth nothing to the purpose if he speak of the Question For this is whether the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures Exod. 18.16 be the chiefe Judge of controversies of Faith not of actions between man and man And this the Reader whose eies are open may easily discerne that this place of Scripture will neither fit Cardinall Bellarmine a Papist nor James Nayler a Quaker Nayler doth alledge divers other Scriptures of the same nature to the same purpose As that in Solomons prayer 1 Kin. 3.9 1 Kin. 3. That God would give him an understanding heart that he might judge Gods people to which the former answer may give full satisfaction 3. 1 Cor. 2 15 16. Nayler alledgeth that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 2. He that is spirituall judgeth all things yet he himselfe is judged of no man for who hath known the mind of the Lord that he might instruct him but we have the mind of Christ Therefore if Nayler may judge it is not the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures but the Spirit speaking in such spirituall men as he is which is the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith And herein the Quaker exceeds Cardinall Bellarmine by far for the popish Cardinall would have infallibility of spirit only in the Pope and his company but the Quaker maketh every particular spirituall man a spirituall Pope to be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith otherwise Naylers Scripture is nothing to the Question for the Question is not concerning a private inferiour or particular Judge but concerning a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith as Nayler himselfe repeateth it Question the first To give an answer to this and divers other Scriptures alledged by Nayler But that he cannot away with a Distinction he might know that there is a twofold Judge of Controversies First A Magisteriall Judge as I may so call it a supreme highest directing publike Judge to judge and discerne and direct and finally sentence in the Church all Controversies of Faith And this is the holy Scriptures and the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures to which Christ himselfe did appeale and direct his hearers to appeale unto in that great Controversie of Faith John 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them ye think to have eternall life and they are they that testifie of me which we noted before Againe there is a Ministeriall inferiour more private Judge of spirituall things and so of Controversies of Faith And this may be every particular spirituall regenerate man or Christian according to the measure of that light of the Spirit and grace of Faith he hath received from Christ and for the satisfaction of his owne conscience by the light of the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures and the light of Christ within him he may so far as he is able judge of opinions and doctrines of men whether they agree to the doctrine of Christ in the holy
and holiness and by our own good conversation 1 Pet. 2.15 put to silence the scandals of malicious the ignorance of foolish men that God wil give repentance free pardon in Christ to all our Adversaries who complain of us as contentious because though after long sufferings we seeke in a just and lawfull way to recover our due and just Rights which they unjustly detaine from us desiring if it be the will of God that they may obtaine salvation in the Lord Jesus and be delivered from wrath to come and that one day they may enjoy a happy and peaceable communion with us in glory and to conclude daily powring out my soule to God That the Lord the great Protector of Sion will be pleased to preserve his Highness and Honourable Councell and you my Honourable Lords and the rest of the Honourable Judges Justices Magistrates and other Worthies who are Actors for Piety and Peace to Gods glory and the benefit of these Nations together with this whole Common wealth in Truth Unity and Peace long to continue Most humbly subscribing my selfe Your Honours daily Oratour at the Throne of Grace Immanuel Bourne Pastor of the Church in Ashover London Feb. 26. 1655. A Defence of the Scriptures and of the Holy Spirit of God speaking in them as the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith c. In a Disputation at Chesterfield in the County of Darby Jan. 3. 1654. FIrst when the Ministers came to the Church or Meeting House-yard Iames Nayler was there with his company but seemed unwilling to goe into the Church or Church-House yet at last went into the lower end and stood there But when Mr Billingsley Minister of Chesterfield began with praier to God for a blessing upon the meeting Nayler and his fellowes went forth againe pretending some plot might be against them But after praier assurance given there was none they came in againe Secondly Mr John Billingsley began to read the Questions But after Nayler read them in the Paper sent to him as I take it and then began to read his Answer in writing and when he had read his Answer to the first Question it was desired that that Question and his Answer to that might be first Argued and so the rest afterwards in order Question 1 The first Question was Whether the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures bee the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Mr Bourne shewed Nayler the Bible and asked him if he would owne that as Gods word he answered part of it or to that effect First For the state of the Question By the Spirit was meant the Spirit of God 1 Iohn 5.7 the third Person in Trinity one with the Father and the Sonne Secondly by the Scriptures the Canonicall books of the Old and New Testament Thirdly By the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures that voice or speaking forth of Gods Spirit recorded in Scripture which is there now to be found so whether the holy Scriptures or Spirit in them be judg This state was not so fully opened by reason of disturbance even in the entrance Nayler endeavouring to avoid this Question Naylers Answer Nayler in his Answer owned the Spirit that did speake in the holy men who gave forth the holy Scriptures to be Judge and said that Spirit was Judge before the Letter was written and all Controversies were judged by that Spirit but hee did not owne that Spirit that doth now speak in the Scriptures Hee said hee granted the Spirit was Judge and would have avoided the Question Mr Bournes Reply But Mr Bourne pressed to go on with the Question and affirmed it was one thing to say the Spirit that did speake in the holy men that gave out the Scriptures was Judge and another to say the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures was Judge or that the holy Scripture was Judge Therefore pressed to go on with the Question and began as I remember with this Reason Mr Bourns 1 Argument Whatsoever was and is the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost himselfe that was and is the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith but the holy Scriptures are the speaking forth of the holy Spirit himselfe therefore they are the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first proposition was not denied and the second was proved Acts 1.16 the Scripture which the holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake concerning Judas Here it is evident what Scriptures David writ or spake by writing that the Holy Ghost spake Therefore the holy Scripture is the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost and so judge of Controversies The same again witnessed by the Spirit Acts 28.25 wel spake the Holy Ghost by the mouth of Isaias the Prophet saying c. Here you see the Holy Ghost is witnessed by the Apostle Paul to speak by the mouth of Isaias and that Scripture which Isaiah writ was the speaking forth of the Holy Ghost and so the supreme Judge of Controversies c. Naylers Answer Nayler gave no direct answer but he wrangled and said he did owne the Spirit to be Judge but not the written word or to that effect and that the Spirit did speak not in the dead but in the living which was as I did understand him not in the dead letter of the Scripture but in living men and vapoured as if he had said much but yet would have avoided the Question as needlesse to be further disputed on since he did yield the Spirit to be Judge although he denyed that the Spirit speaking in Scripture was the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But Mr Bourn went on to press another Argument Mr Bourns 2 Argument Whatsoever Christ himselfe did appeale unto as to a chiefe Judge and send his hearers unto as to a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith that is and ought to be esteem'd the chief Judge of Controversies of Faith But Christ himselfe appealed to the Scriptures and sent his hearers to the Scriptures as to the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith therefore the holy Scriptures are the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first not denyed the second witnessed by the Spirit in John 5.39 in that great controversie of Faith whether Christ were the Sonne of God or equall with God Christ appeales to the Scriptures Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to have eternall life and they are they that testifie of me therefore the Scriptures are the chiefe Judge Naylers Answer Nayler did not give any answer to satisfie the Argument but said still the Spirit was the Judge not the written word and cried out liar liar hold thy peace the Spirit is Judge not the written word Mr Bourne bad him yield the Question since Christ himselfe appealed to the Scriptures But he cried out and one of his fellow Quakers away lyar the Spirit is Judge Mr Bourn replied The Spirit is Judge but not the Spirit speaking in any man but the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures and pressed
Scriptures I say to the satisfaction of a man or womans owne conscience in what they are to believe yea those to whom God hath given a more excellent measure of understanding in the mystery of Christ revealed in the Scriptures these may in some measure judge or be inferiour Judges of spirituall things and of private mens opinions in the Controversies of Faith For the Spirit of the Prophets 1 Cor. 14.32 is subject to the Prophets but all private spirits of men in the world yea the Pope himselfe and all the Quakers they are and must bee subject one day to the voice of Gods Spirit speaking in the holy Scriptures and that word of Christ recorded in holy Scriptures shall judge them all at the last day witnesse our Saviour himselfe John 12.48 The Quaker abuseth other places of holy Scripture But the Answers I have given may satisfie any understanding Reader I shal name only one more from Nayler and his fellow Quakers which seems to conclude against the Scriptures excellency and authority of being chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith calling the holy Scriptures a dead letter and the letter that killeth all to discountenance the credit of the Scriptures to exalt their owne private spirit The place of Scripture they pervert is that of the Apostle 2 Cor. 3.6 Who hath made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the letter but of the Spirit for the letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life I might answer at large shew how the letter is taken in severall places of Scripture and evidence the falshood of Naylers application of this place also but in briefe The letter is taken 1. Propperly for the first Elements or beginnings of learning for the letters in severall languages from which by spelling and putting together are made syllables and words and sentences in and by which the mind of God and men is held forth to our understanding as in those letters of Greek and Latine and Hebrew which were written over Christ upon his Crosse Luke 23.38 And these letters may be called dead letters because of themselves they signifie nothing to declare the mind of the writer except they be joined and put together inâ— syllables words and sentences Againe Improperly and more generally letters are taken severall waies in Scripture for Epistles private or publick 2 Cor. 3.6 c. And in that place alledged The letter killeth The Apostle doth speak of the Law which he opposeth to the Gospell which is the ministration of the Spirit as will appear plainly if the Chapter be truly looked into yea the Law it selfe doth not properly kill of it selfe but is said to kill when men break it and so are become subject to death by sinning against it Rom. 7.12 13. Rom. 6.27 Psal 119.50 for the wages of sinne is death otherwise the Law and word of God doth quicken as David found by experience Psal 119. And the written words of God are lively oracles Acts 7.38 Heb. 4.12 2 Tim. 3.16 17 as the blessed Martyr Stephen witnessed yea mighty in operation and able to make us wise to salvation and therefore most fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith whatsoever the deluding Quakers pretend to the contrary Thus I have done with the first Question I come now to the second Question Mr Bourns Argument The second Question Whether the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith This was denyed and Mr Bourne proved the negative by this Argument No Spirit which is subject to tryall it selfe can be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith but the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker is subject to tryall it self therefore the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker cannot be the chiefe Judge of any Controversies of Faith The first proposition was not denied and the second is witnessed 1 John 4. Beloved believe not every spirit but try the spirits whether they be of God for many false Prophets are gone out into the world And here you may see the Evangelist giveth a generall rule for Christians to try the spirit all spirits in any man yea all that pretend to the Spirit of God as the Pope and the Quakers doe therefore their spirits are to be tried and so are not fit to be chiefe Judges of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer James Nailer wrangled about the Spirit but gave no satisfying answer to the Argument but said the Spirit was not a private spirit if he was but in one against a hundred and said the Spirit was in them and he was Judge in them as if the Spirit in the Quaker were a publick infallible Spirit and so fit to be the chief Judge of Controversies of Faith which cannot be for if the Spirit of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets 1 Cor. 14.32 then much more the Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker subject to tryall and therefore they cannot bee the chiefe Judges of Controversiies of Faith Mr Bourns 2 Argument Then Mr Bourne pressed a second Argument No Spirit which is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation is or can be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But the Spirit in the Quaker and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation therefore that Spirit in them cannot be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith The first proposition is cleare because a chiefe Judge must and ought to have in him a Spirit not of errour lying and false accusation but a Spirit of truth and righteousnesse that he may bee directed to give true judgement and not to wrest or give wrong sentence for this is contrary to the Law of God Exod 23.6 7. Thou shalt not wrest the judgement of the poor in his cause and keep the farre from a false matter c. Therefore a Spirit of lying and Errour and false accusation is not fit to be a chiefe Judge of Controversies especially not of Controversies of Faith And for the second proposition that the Spirit in the Quaker and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation Mr Bourne proved it by these Arguments Mr Bournes Argument Whatsoever Spirit did or doth affirme and falsely accuse the Ministers of Christ in England that they erre and are false Teachers because they say the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospell that is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation But the Spirit that is in James Nayler and some of his fellow Quakers did or doth accuse the Ministers of Christ in England that they erre and are false Teachers because they affirme the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John to be the Gospell therefore the Spirit in the Quakers and in James Nayler in particular is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation and so not fit to be chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith To
have no light in them then all men have not a light within them sufficient to direct them to attaine salvation But there are some men that have no light in them witness the Prophet Isaiah chap. 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this rule it is because there is no light in them Therefore all men have not a light within them sufficient to direct them to attaine salvation Naylers Answer James Nayler vapoured and said that place made most against us But he gave no answer to shew how that place did make against us but cryed out all are enlightned by Christ and that light of Christ is in them all lyars lyars all are enlightned Thus in a proud contemptuous manner did Nayler behave himselfe and as his manner was when hee could not answer turned aside and talked to those that were about him and at last affirmed againe that all had a light within them sufficient to guide them to attaine salvation Naylers Argument because Christ said to the Pharisees Luke 17.21 The Kingdome of God is within you in you Pharisees and therefore in all and so the Kingdome of God being in all all are sufficiently enlightned to direct them to attaine salvation Mr Bournes Answer To which Answer was given to this effect That the Kingdome of God is taken diversly in the holy Scriptures 1. For the Kingdome of Gods power which is Gods soveraignty over all the world and this Kingdome of God is in every creature and in and over every man in the world he sets up and puls downe 1 Sam. 2.6 7 8 c. Dan. 4.30 c. kils and maketh alive at his pleasure and ruleth and over-ruleth all when and how he will and this Kingdome of God was in the Pharisees as in all men whatsoever 2. The Kingdome of God is taken for the Kingdome of Gods Grace and this diversly taken also First for the outward administration of the comming and Kingdome of the Messiah Christ Jesus in the Gospell of which the Pharisees questioned Christ in that place Luke 17. Luke 17.20 Gen. 49.10 demanding when the Kingdome of God should come that is the Kingdome of the Messiah which was prophecied and promised should come Psal 2. Psal 45.6 7. Luke 2.25 26. and which the Saints and people of God did expect and waite for And John the Baptist the forerunner of Christ told the people this Kingdome was at hand This Kingdome is called the Kingdome of Heaven Mat. 3.2 Mat. 13.24 44. Acts 1.3 and it is taken for the Gospel and Gospel Administrations and this Kingdome and comming of Christ this King not only the Scribes and Pharisees Luke 24.21 but some of the Disciples did think should come in outward pompe and power to deliver the Jewes from the tyranny of the Romans under whom they were tributaries But Christ giveth them answer in that 20 verse Luke 17 20. The Kingdome of Christ the Messiah which they enquired after commeth not with observation or with outward pompe but saith Christ the Kingdome of God is within you not individually or personally as if the Kingdome of heaven the Gospell and Christ the Messiah had been in every one of them particularly or in every Pharisee but collectively or as they were a company of Pharisees or people of the Jewes The Kingdome of God is within you or rather amongst you as the Greek word is well translated in the margin of our Bibles in that place And thus Expositors agree ye seeke the Messiah as if hee were absent when hee is in the middest of you Beza upon the Text. Pâ—scator on that place Thus Passor Iex con c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in medio vestri intra gentem vestram within your nation saith Beza And Piscator The Kingdome of God is in the middest of you in the bosome of your Nation The Kingdome of God is within you understand it not as every one is looked upon by and in himselfe but as one body of many people collected or joined together in one body or Nation And the Kingdome of God in this sence was in and amongst the Pharisees and people to whom Christ did preach at that time Againe the Kingdome of Grace is taken for the gifts and Graces of the Kingdome or which Christ the King giveth to his subjects and servants and by his Spirit worketh in them as Knowledge Faith Love Righteousness Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost and such like inward spirituall Riches and Graces of the spirit by which God doth rule and reigne in the heats of his children and this Kingdome is in Gods Elect his chosen and faithfull and called ones Rev. 17.14 not only amongst them but in them but this Kingdome or these graces of the Kingdome of Christ the Messiah and Christs Spirit was not in the Pharisees to whom Christ did preach though it was amongst them in such as were true beleevers Gods faithfull servants This Answer was delivered far shorter but to this effect and purpose Naylers Reply But Nayler according to his accustomed manner cried out lyars lyars it is false Christ speaketh of the Kingdome of Grace and that was in the Pharisees and so in all and all have a light in them to which they may look as sufficient to guide them to Salvation or to that effect Mr Bournes Reply Mr Bourne did Reply Iohn 3.1 Iohn 19.38 39 that some of the Pharisees may be were beleevers as Nicodemus who came to Jesus by night and was at cost with Joseph of Arimathea at the buriall of Christ who was a Disciple though secretly for feare of the Jewes And if this Kingdome of Grace was in any of the Pharisees they must be such as were beleevers for other wise in unbeleevers and wicked Pharisees who kept men to their power from confessing of Christ to be the Messiah Iohn 12.42 in them Christ was not nor the Kingdome nor the graces of Christs Kingdome For in unbeleevers where sinne ruleth and reigneth in their mortall bodies and they obey it in the lusts thereof there or in their soules Rom. 6.12 16. the Kingdome of Grace is not for Christ and sinne cannot reign both together in one soule This answer was shorter likewise but to this intent Naylers Reply But Nayler would not yield the Question for all this but told the people the Kingdome of God was in the Pharisees and we were lyars that denied it Mr Maudâ—slâ—y's Question Mr Maudesley if my memory did not faile me or some one neer him asked Nayler what Kingdome that was which Christ spake of after his resurrection Acts 1. Acts. 1.3 He was seen of them forty daies speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdome of God Naylers Reply Nayler did not answer what that Kingdome was but said Christ was not seene after his Ascension In which Nayler did mistake Answer for it was not after Christs Ascension but after his
A defence of the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit speaking in them as the chiefe Iudge of Controversies of Faith and of the light in them as needfull to be looked unto for direction to attaine Salvation With a Vindication of that Honour due to Magistrates Ministers and others according to their Places and Dignities In a Relation of a Disputation at Chesterfield in the County of Darby between some Ministers of the Gospell and James Nayler an erring Quaker The Questions disputed were these foure 1. Whether the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Affirmed by us Ministers of Christ 2. Whether the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker be the chiefe Judge of Controversies Denyed 3. Whether every man be bound to looke to the light within him as sufficient for his direction to attaine Salvation Denyed 4. Whether it be lawfull to call any man Master or Father upon earth or to give any honour to man Affirmed In which The Truth is confirmed and the Quakers Errors and Blasphemies discovered and confuted and many places of Scripture from the Quakers false applications cleared With some Animadversions upon a lying Relation of that disputation published by Iames Nayler A man that is an Hereticke after the first and second admonition reject knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himselfe Tit. 3.10 11. By Immanuel Bourne Pastor of the Church in Ashover in the County of DARBY London Printed for John Wright at the Kings Head in the Old Bailey 1656. To the Right Honourable Iohn Glyn Lord chiefe Justice and to the Honorable Richard Aske Peter Warbarton Justices of the Upper Bench. To the Right Honourable Oliver Saint Iohn Lord Chiefe Justice and to the Honorable Edward Atkins Matthew Hales Hugh Windham Justices of the Court of Common Pleas. To the Right Honorable William Steele Lord chiefe Baron and to the Honorable Iohn Parker Ro Nicolas R Tomlins Barons of His Highness Court of Exchequer To the Right Honorable Commissiary Generall Edward Whaley Major Generall of the Counties of Nottingham Darby Lincoln Leicester Warwick And to all other the Honorable and Worshipfull Justices and Officers for the preservation of piety and the peace of the Nation The blessing of truth and true peace here eternal happines hereafter Right Honorable MAY it please your honours to give me leave to become your humble remembrancer That when Joshua that religious wise faithfull and valiant Captaine Generall of all the Armies of Israel had conquered one thirty Kings and by Gods assistance setled the Lords people in the promised land to witnesse his care of piety as well as of peace He calleth for all Israel for their Elders their Heads their Judges and for their Officers and mindeth them of the mighty works the Lord had done for them and pressed them upon that account to stir up their affections to love the Lord their God and to feare him and serve him in truth and sincerity yea to put away their false gods and false worship from amongst them And we read likewise of faithfull Samuel that hee judged Israel all the daies of his life and hee went from yeare to yeare in Circuit to Bethel and Gilgal and Mizpeh and he judged Israel in all those places and his returne was to Ramah for there was his house and there he judged Israel and there he built an Altar unto the Lord Thus here you see there was both Justice and Piety in this holy man of God and Israel was blessed in such a Judge We cannot but acknowledge that the Lord hath done great things in these Nations and wee doe enjoy peace and plenty and many mercies which we have not prized nor improved as we ought to the best advantage for Gods glory and our own good Under his Highnesse protection and the present Government through the grace of God every man may sit quietly under his own vine and fig-tree without feare of plundering a happiness which in few yeares past we did not enjoy Yea we have good Lawes and honourable religious Judges and Magistrates to see Justice executed and right done between man and man and wee enjoy our comfortable Liberty of preaching and hearing the Gospell of Christ Yet can we not say there is no complaining nor cause of complaint in our streets The Church and people of God have met with enemies in all ages Cant. 2.2 As is the Lillie amongst the thorns so is my beloved among the daughters and as it was of old so it is in these our daies the Church and people of God especially Gods faithfull Ministers suffer persecution by two sorts of people The first prophane Ranters Atheisticall men Drunkards Gamesters and ignorant blind soules such as neglect publike Ordinances in these times of liberty and have no right principle of grace and goodness in them These make it a delight to exercise their malice against the Ministers of Christ These would rob and spoile them to the uttermost if it were in their power And this we can witness we have found true by troublesome experience Againe there is another sort of people which travell up and downe the Nation under the name of Quakers as the Jesuits and seminary Priests have used to doe secretly so these now openly disswading and seducing our people all they can from commitig to our Churches or meeting houses calling our Churches Idols Temples All our services to God in praier preaching of the word and other Christian exercises ordinary and extraordinary when wee seeke the face of God for the peace and welfare of the Nation for the prosperity of our Navie and Armies both by sea and land or our praising God for his mercies we do enjoy All these say the Quakers are but Idol-worship In a Quakers book called a Discovery of a threefold state of Antichrist by Samuel Ballivant c. and beastly services and all the faithfull and godlie Ministers of Christ without exception are thieves our maintenance by Tithes Antichristian and unlawfull Yea they call us Conjurers Antichrists witches devils liars a viperous and serpentine generation blasphemers scarlet coloured beasts Babylons Merchants whited wals painted Sepulchres and whatsoever the true Prophets of God or Christ our Saviour did justly call the false Prophets wicked priests and Scribes and Pharisees those names do these rayling and reviling Quakers give to the godly painfull learned and faithfull Ministers of Christ in the Nation disswading our people from hearing us or giving heed to any thing we preach disturbing us in our publike ministrie And what can we call this but a persecution like that of those wicked men against the good Prophet Jeremie Come say they and let us smiâ—e him with the tongue and let us not give heed to any of his words Jer. 18.18 And what is persecution if this be not Yea such is the malice of these Jesuited Quaking adversaries against the ministers of Christ
evidence the second proposition Mr Bourne did shew a book the Title of it was concerning a threefold Antichrist or to that effect The same in effect by Richard Tarnworth in his discovery of Faith or rather of infidelity page 13. This was set out by some Quaker and in page the 13. in the very leafe in which beginneth a Letter of James Naylers to severall friends about Wakefield when Nayler was prisoner at Appleby There is Printed this false accusation of the Ministers in England as of Errour because they say the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospell or containe the glad tidings of salvation through Jesus Christ therefore the Quakers are not fit to be the chiefe Judges of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer Nayler answered hee did owne that Letter writ to his friends about Wakefield and said the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John were not the Gospell but Christ was the Gospell Mr Bourns Reply Mr Bourne went on to prove that the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John were the Gospell by this Argument Whatsoever book the Spirit of God by the mouth of the Evangelist Marke calleth the Gospell that is the Gospel but the Spirit of God by the mouth of the Evangelist Marke calleth the book of Marke the Gospell therefore that book of Marke is the Gospell The first proposition is unquestionable The second is witnessed Marke 1.1 Marke 1.1 The beginning of the Gospell of Jesus Christ the Sonne of God as it is written in the Prophets Observe first That the Evangelist affirmeth that the Gospel was written in the Prophets Secondly that he calleth the beginning of that book the beginning of the Gospell not that the Gospell was not before for the Gospell was preached to Adam and Eve in Paradise after the Fall Gen. 3.15 But the seed of the woman shall break the serpents head but that it was the beginning of that book of the Gospell of that history of Christ and declaration of salvation by Christ Jesus For what is the Gospell but good newes or good tidings of a Saviour as that Angell speaketh Luke 2.10 And good tidings of Christ is not Christ himselfe and so the Gospell is not Christ himselfe but good newes of salvation by Christ This is the book of Marke the Gospell and thus are the books of Matthew Luke and John the Gospell and the Quaker denying this and accusing the Ministers of Christ as of Errour for affirming it this assertion is plainely proved that the Spirit in the Quaker is a Spirit of Errour lying and false accusation and so not fit to be the Judge of Controversies of Faith Naylers Reply Nayler had nothing to answer but lyar lyar hold thy tongue and sit downe for Christ is the Gospell the books of Matthew Marke Luke and John are not the Gospell Mr Bournes Argument Mr Bourne began to presse another Argument out of a booke of one Nicolas Cowlings Nicol. Cowling his word to 52 London Ministers p. 15 c. A word to the 52 London Ministers pages 15 16. whereing he blasphemously compareth Christ that dyed at Jerusalem to a woodden leg Let me be bold saith he to impart unto you my former experience in the mystery of Christ I thought a long while a faith in Christ that died at Jerusalem was the top gallant of a Christian but since it doth appeare I Answer There was a twofold Faith in the person of Christ 1. Erring of an outward Redemption from Roman tyranny of which Luke 24 21. Acts 1.16 2. True Faith of an eternall Redemption from sinne c. and purchase of liternall happinesse for his people in Heaven of which Mat. 1.21 Iohn 1.29 6 47 14 1 2 3. The Erring faith died with Christ but the true faith in Christs person did not dye as the Blasphemer imagineth c. that faith the Disciples had in the person of Christ died with him c. therefore it is Christ in the mystery that will save A woodden legge saith he that is tyed on may do some service but it is the legge naturall that is usefull for all occasions Thus doth this blasphemer make Christ our Saviour that died for us at Jerusalem but as a woodden legge But it is not that Christ that died at Jerusalem mighty to save not only by the work of sanctification in us by his Spirit through Faith to purifie our hearts but by the worke of justification by his blood and merits of his death and passion by which he hath made our peace even by the blood of his crosse and righteousnesse imputed to us for our justification before God as by our holinesse and good workes we are declared to be justified before men For God made him to be sinne for us who knew no sinne that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him But this Spirit in this deceived Quaker or Erring Sectary who glories in his perfection and disgracefully calleth Christ that died at Jerusalem a woodden legge it is an Erring spirit and therefore not fit to be judge of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer James Nayler would give no Answer to this but said he would not answer for any but himselfe Yet certainly James Nayler needed not then to have disowned that or denied to answer for it is nothing but what he himselfe did owne before Read the Perfect Pharisee p. 8. position 5. as appeares by that expression of his in a Letter sent by him to one in Lancashire That he that expected to be saved by him that died at Jerusalem should be deceived This witnessed by those reverend Divines who writ that book called the Perfect Pharisee And it seemeth it is their common opinion as may appeare by that speech of another Quaker neer Bristoll who said he was not such a foole as to hope to be saved by Jesus Christ that died at Jerusalem sixteen hundred yeares agoe Mr Farmer in his mystery of godlinesse and ungodlinesse witnessed by Reverend Mr Farmer a Reverend Minister in Bristol This spirit in the Quaker cannot be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Mr Billingsleys Argument Then Mr John Billingsley to prove that the Spirit in the Quakers and in James Nayler in particular was a lying scandalizing Spirit and so not fit to be Judge of Controversies of Faith brought an Argument to this purpose That Spirit whatsoever that did or doth affirm that Bul-baiting swearing cursing and such like are the fruits of John Billingsley's Ministrie that is a lying scandalizing Spirit but the Spirit that is in thee James Nayler or thou thy selfe James Nayler diddest affirme that Bul-baiting swearing cursing and such like is or are the fruits of John Billingsley's Ministery therefore thy Spirit is a lying scandalizing Spirit and so not fit to be Judge of Controversies of Faith For the first proposition I John Billingsley doe appeale to all the Congregations which have heard me preach in Chesterfield or else where
if ever I preached any such doctrine or did ever countenance any such thing neither was I at home at Chesterfield when the Bul-baiting was nor did I know any thing of it but am altogether innocent And for the second proposition That thou James Nayler diddest falsely accuse me John Billingsley it is evident by thy owne hand writing in this paper which thou diddest send to me subscribed with thy name in which are these words viz. This day is the fruits of thy Ministry manifest in the open streets a multitude gathered together to sport themselves in setting one of the Creatures of God against another to torment thy people thou teachest whooting yelling Mr Billingsley did then read these words written by Iames Nayler to him c. swearing cursing and blaspheming the dreadfull name of God Is this thy Ministry c. Thus diddest thou falsly accuse me and my Ministry therefore thy Spirit is a lying and false accusing Spirit and so not fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer To which Nayler said he did owne that paper and shuffled to excuse himselfe and said he did not say so but that the people to whom he did preach were so doing viz. swearing cursing c. Mr Billingsley's Reply But Mr Billingsley read the paper to all the congregation wherein it did appeare that Nayler had writ that Bul-baiting swearing and cursing were the fruits of Mr Billingsley's Ministry Naylers Answer At which Nayler knew not what to say for himselfe but still persisted with an audacious face to justifie himselfe and called Mr Billingsley liar liar and bad him hold his tongue Mr Billingsley's Reply Upon which Mr Billingsley said what a desperate fellow art thou so shamelessely to deny that which thou hast writ with thy owne hand and dost now againe prove thy selfe to be a lyar and a false accuser and wilt not confesse thy Errour or to that purpose Naylers Answer But Nayler vapoured and called Mr Billingsley lyar and said he had accused him to be a lyar and a persecutor of the Ministers of Christ Mr Billingsley's Reply But Mr Billingsley did justifie that Nayler was a lyar and a persecutor and that his false accusation was a persecution or to that effect And I might now add well so he might For may not all men see that the Quakers and James Nayler himselfe are as malicious persecutors of the Ministers of Christ in England as ever they had And would they not be as bloody as ever any if it lay in their power witnesse their cruell threatnings both in their printed Pamphlets and by word of mouth against us witnesse their labouring by all meanes to pull downe the very Calling and Ministeriall Office witnesse their endeavour to hinder the people to pay us any maintenance though due unto us both by the Law of God and the Nation Ierem 18.18 Do they not smite us with the tongue as Jeremies enemies did him and disswade our people from giving heed to any of our words And what are these but persecutions Rev. 12.10 or what is persecution if this be not and who are lyars if these be none and who is a diabolicall false accuser Iohn Bâ—nting en Elder of the Church in Ashover if James Nayler is not John Bunting an honest Yeoman of more true spirituall understanding then many Quakers sitting by Nayler at this disputation writing in short hand what Nayler said Nayler seeing him write said to him thou writest lyes there To whom John Bunting Replyed Nayler thou art the father of them then for I write what thou speakest Whereupon I may observe and argue what may be argued from what St Paul did affirme of the Cretians and of the vain talkers and deceivers amongst them That one of their owne Prophets said The Cretians are alwaies lyars evill beasts slow bellies Tit. 1. Tit. 1.10 11 12. And if the Cretians were lyars then that Prophet was a lyar that said so because he was a Cretian and if the Cretians were not lyars then he was a lyar for saying they were lyars when they were not In like manner if Iohn Bunting did write lies then Nayler was and is a lyar because Iohn Bunting did write that which Nayler spake and if Iohn Bunting did not write lies then Iames Nayler is the lyar because he falsely accused Iohn Bunting for writing lies when he did not so that Iames Nayler is proved the lyar out of his owne mouth and pen and having a spirit of lying he is not fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Thus I have done with the Disputation upon this Question Whether the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith I shall only add one Argument more and passe forwards Mr Bournes additionall Argument No Spirit that is a Spirit of Errour and Blasphemy is fit to be or can be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But the Spirit in Iames Nayler and other Quakers is a Spirit of Errour and Blasphemy Therefore the Spirit in Iames Nayler and other Quakers is not fit nor can be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith For the first proposition certainly the Quakers themselves will not deny it and if they doe deny it no honest Christian will deny it and for the second it may be witnessed by these instances 1. Blasphemy against God whilest they doe affirme they are equall with God See Saules Errand to Damascus p. 5 6 7 8. This was witnessed against George Fox as is confessed by Fox and Nayler one or both If that Booke they call Sauls Errand to Damascus be theirs as their proselytes boast it is and seek after it to learn their wicked doctrines It was objected say they That George Fox professed and owned that he was equall with God Sâ—â— the Perfect Pharisâ—â— p. 3. And in the Perfect Pharisee it is witnessed That George Fax being asked by Dr. Marshall in the presence of two Justices of Peace in Lancashire namely Mr Thomson and Mr Lawry whether he did believe himselfe to be equall with God the said Fox in answer thereunto positively affirmed thus I am saith he equall with God and this was deposed by Dr Marshall and Mr Altham School-Master of Lancaster at the generall Sessions in Westmerland and was deposed againe before the honourable Judge Puleston at Lancaster the next Assises after witness that booke called the Perfect Pharisee Perfect Pharisee by Mr Tâ—â—mas Wâ—ld Mr Râ—chard Pridâ—aâ—â— Mr Samuel Hammond Mr William 〈◊〉 Mr Will. Dâ—rant The Perfect Pharâ—see p 3. c. made by those five Reverend Divines nere New Castle p. 3 which declares part of the Quakers blasphemies in the page before recited And in the same book it is witnessed against Iames Nayler that he being asked by William Baldwinson of Underbarrow in Westmorland whether he believed that any could be as holy Just and good as God himselfe
darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God And thus againe it is evident that all have not a light within them sufficient to direct them to salvation and therefore are not bound to looke to that as a sufficient light which is weak and insufficient as the light of every naturall man is Nailers Answer To which Argument Nayler gave his common Answer crying out aloud as before lyar lyar all have a light within them to which they ought to looke as sufficient to direct them to Salvation Iohn Buntings Argument Upon which Iohn Bunting of Ashover named before an understanding Christian sitting neer Nayler Replyed to him Dead men have no light in them but every naturall man is a dead man dead in trespasses and sins Ephes 2.1 2 3. â—s witnesseth the Apostle Eph. 2. and what light is there then in a naturall dead man sufficient to direct him to attaine salvation Naylers Answer Nayler Answered not to the Argument concerning naturall mens blindness but said Christ had enlightned all men Iohn 1.9 and alledged that place Iohn 1.9 He is that light that lightens every man that commeth into the world and thence he would inferre every man is enlightned and hath a light within him sufficient to direct him to attaine Salvation or to that purpose so neer as I could remember Mr Bournes Answer to this Scipture alledged A first light Unto this Scripture I did then answer to this effect by distinguishing of light and said there was a two-fold light The first the light of nature the remnant of that created light of the knowledge of God in man by which men might know so much of God by the Creatures Rom. 1.19 20. as may make them without excuse Rom. 1.19 And which is a sparke of light naturally in every mans conscience Rom. 2.14 15. Rom. 2. And with this light Christ the Creator God equall with God the Father by whom this light and all things were made he doth enlighten every man that commeth into the world that is into this habitable world in which we dwell and all that are borne into this world in their right mind and senses Christ doth enlighten with this naturall light But this light of nature since the Fall is so darkned that although it may be sufficient in some respects to make men without excuse Rom. 1.20 yet it is not sufficient to reveale Christ or to give sufficient direction to attaine Salvation by Christ Jesus as that light which revealeth Christ in the Gospell Againe there is a second light and this is the light of speciall grace given outwardly by the preaching of the Word and inwardly by the Spirit of God by which a soule is enlightned with such a speciall light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ as he owneth 2 Cor. 4 6 7. and by faith embraceth Christ Rom. 5. not only as a Justifier by his blood and merits but a Sanctifier by his Spirit and grace in the soule and so a perfect Saviour both from sinne here and from wrath to come hereafter as due to sinne And this in ward light of speciall grace every man to whom God hath given it is bound to look unto it in a speciall manner yet not so as to neglect the outward light of the Gospell revealed in the holy Scriptures for the getting of more light because we know here but in part 1 Cor. 13 9 10 11 12. and therefore should waite for more light of grace untill we come to enjoy a perfection of light in glory Because this speciall light of grace held forth in the Gospell is not given to all for all do not know the mystery of the Gospell nor is it given unto all witnesse our Saviour Mat. 13.11 To you it is given saith he to know the mysteries of the Kingdome of God but to others it is not given And the Evangelist John himselfe in the same Chapter Iohn 1.9 10 11 c. in which he affirmeth that Christ is the true light that lightneth every man that commeth into the world in the very next verse he affirmeth that Christ was in the world and the world did not know him yea he came to his owne and his owne received him not But if all in the world had this speciall light of grace within them they would have known Christ Iohn 18.35 yea if all his owne people the people of the Jewes his owne Nation had received this speciall light of grace they would have received Christ But many of them were in blindnesse yea darknesse it selfe and did not know Christ for had they knowne him they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory witnesse the Apostle 1 Cor. 2.7 8. Thâ—â— answer was delivered logically in more briefe termes but to the same effect and more fully and largely expressed now for weak brethrens sakes that they may more easily understand Naylers deceits in his answer who gave that more largely also in his written paper then at the Disputation for that was commonly very short It is false it is false and lyar lyar And this was Naylers Reply to this Distinction of light given by me It is false lyar hold thy peace and sit downe there is but one light that lightens every man that commeth into the world and in a vapouring manner doubled it againe there is but one light which lightneth every man that commeth into the world M. Maudâ—slâ—y Mr Maudsley as I remember Minister of Dronfield sitting neer Nayler asked him what world he did meane Nayler Question Nayler answered there is but one world and that is the world of men he was asked againe whether he himselfe was in the world or out of the world Answer to which Nayler answered that he was out of the world unto which Answer some one replyed it were well if thou wast out of the world that thou mightest not spread thy errours as thou dost in the world Nayler wrangled still about the world and said there was but one world and that was the world of men which were all enlightned Then one that was neer Nayler asked Nayler what world that was into which Christ came Iohn 16.28 when he came out from his Father and which he left when he went to his Father againe And Nayler shufied and would have avoided the Question upon which there fell out a wrangling and other passages impertinent to the Question in hand which for brevity I omit here and shall remember them in my Animadversions upon Naylers false Relation Mr Bourne Whiles they were wrangling Mr Bourne did call to Nayler to leave wrangling and hearken to another Argument to prove that all men had not a light within them sufficient to direct them to attaine salvation and was giving forth an Argument Mr Moors Argument But Mr Moor Minister of Brampton stept in and gave this Argument or to this effect If there be some men that
horsemen thereof Thus you see titles of honour Lord Master Father are both given and received by holy men and this without any reproofe or check of the Spirit of God recorded in the Scriptures concerning any of these examples therefore sure it was and is lawfull to give and receive titles of respect and honour to call or be called Lord or Master or Father according to every ones place and dignity All these places of Scripture were not then alledged Naylers Answer And James Nayler by his loud clamour hindred the pressing and application of those places that were alledged as much as he could and cried out that was in the Law but now in the Gospell Christ forbids to call any man Master or to be called of men Masters or Father and alledged that of our Saviour Mat. 23. But be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren and call no man your Father upon earth for one is your Father which is in heaven And hence Nayler would infer That now in time of the Gospell it was not lawfull tocall any man Master or to be called of men Master or Father upon earth Mr Bournes Reply Then I replied and bad Nayler read the context in the verses before and if his eies were open he might see the mind of Christ that it was not absolutely to forbid his hearers to call any man Master or Father but to forbid the ambitious seeking of honor and the ambitious love of honour which was in the Scribes and Pharisees This you may finde is that that he reproveth in them in the 6 and 7 verfes They love saith Christ the uppermost rooms at Feasts and the chiefe seats in the Synagogues and greetings in the Markets and to be called of men Rabbi Rabbi And this ambitious pride and love of honour from men Christ reproveth in the Pharisees and this he forbiddeth his disciples but be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren he would not have his Apostles to seeke superiority and power one over another in a proud ambitious manner Diotrephes-like to love to have the preheminence as 3 John 9. the Evangelist doth witnesle Diotrephes did Yet our Saviour Christ here doth not simply and absolutely forbid all giving or receiving of honour or of calling or being called of men Master or Father or Lord or Lady or the like Yet it is certaine our Saviour Christ doth forbid so to call Master or Father as to make any man the Master or Father of our Faith instead of Christ or that any man should be called Master or Father so as to take the honour of chiefe Master or Father or Teacher to himselfe which is due to Christ This is that which Christ forbiddeth and this is that which the Apostle Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. Now this I say saith the Apostle that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas and I of Christ One said he was Pauls Disciple another he was Apollos another he was Christs But what saith the Apostle is Christ divided was Paul crucified for you Thus they made Paul the Master or Father of their faith And this the Apostle Paul reproveth here And this Christ our Saviour reproveth and forbiddeth Mat. 23. And Christ doth forbid to give that divine honour which is due to God and Christ that God-man our Saviour to any man in the world but hee doth not forbid to give or receive civill honour and respect one to another according to each mans place and dignity or so to be called of men Master or Father or the like To this effect was the Answer given but more close and briefe then now I give it But Nayler instead of any better Answer cried out lyar lyar hold thy peace for shame doth not Christ plainly forbid to call Father or Master and made a great clamorous noise and bid siâ— downe for shame for shame Mr Bourns Reply Then Mr Bourn called to Nayler and bid him leave his loud shamelesse out cries and hearken to an Argument to prove the Exposition to be truth and according to the mind of Christ which was to this effect Argument 2 Whatsoever Christ himselfe or the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles of Christ doth approve of elsewhere in thenew Testament as lawfull to be done that Christ himselfe doth not forbid in that place Mat. 23. But Christ himselfe and the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles doth elsewhere approve of the calling of men Masters and Fathers and of giving other titles of respect and honour to men Therefore Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not forbid to call any man Master or Father as James Nayler pretendeth The first proposition is witnessed to be clear because Christ is truth yea the way the truth and the life and he is no way contrary to himselfe For Jesus Christ is yesterday and to day and the same for ever Heb. 13. Therefore Christ doth not forbid that here Mat. 23. which he alloweth elsewhere And for the second proposition that Christ and his spirit in the Apostles doth approve and allow fit titles of honour to bee given to men as is agreeable to their conditions in their severall places This will bee evident if you read rightly consider that of the Evangelist Marke 7. Where Christ is witnessed to repeat the Commandement Honour thy Father and thy Mother and in the next verse Christ himselfe giveth the name of Father and Mother to the parents of the man of whom he spake to the Pharisees And saith Christ ye suffer him no more to do ought for his Father and Mother Now Christ certainly would not have named Father and Mother nor have approved of those titles and that relation if it had not been lawfull And the same also doth the Spirit of Christ in the Apostle Paul in divers places read Eph. 6. Col. 3. Col. 4. and you may finde he giveth the titles of Father and Master Honour thy father and mother and fathers provoke not your children and masters give unto your servants that which is just and equall knowing that ye also have a master in heaven And the Apostle Peter to the same effect 1 Pet 2. Honour all men love the brother-hood feare God honour the King the supreme magistrate by whatsoever title he be called And servants be subject to your masters with all feare not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward so that here are earthly fathers and masters as well as God and Christ is our father and master in heaven And therefore it is evident that our Saviour Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not simply and absolutely forbid to call or to bee called master or father for if he had he would not have approved it himselfe nor would the Apostles of Christ who had the Spirit of Christ have done it as we have proved they did to