Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A65862
|
The divine light of Christ in man, and his mediation truly confessed by the people called Quakers. In a brief and gentle examination of John Norris his two treatises concerning the divine light. Intended to wipe off his undue reflection of grossness and confusion on the Quakers notion of the light within. With a postscript to J. N. By G. W. a servant of Christ.
|
Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.
|
1692
(1692)
|
Wing W1924; ESTC R220968
|
14,045
|
25
|
truly as the Saints be the light of the World instrumentally or Light in the Lord who enlightens them Is not Christ intirely in all respects a Light as well as all other Spiritual Good to the Soul For Christ is not divided Ans. 2. 'T is certain that God is Light even the Fountain and Fulness of all true Divine Light and in him is no darkness at all and he hath shined in our hearts to give us the light of the Knowledge of his Glory in the Face of Christ Jesus our Mediator and Way to the Father God is our Light and Salvation in Christ. Therefore for any to suppose R. B. or the Quakers to hold or intend that the Divine Logos Word or true Light which enlightens all Men Joh. 1. is not the Divine Essence or not of the Being or Substance of God is wrongfully to suppose that they oppose or deny the plain Testimony of John the Evangelist which expresly saith In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and that Word was God the same was in the Beginning with God and that In it was Life and the Life was the Light of Men Joh. 1. Which Light therefore was of the very Essence and Substance of the Deity 'T is certain that Jesus Christ as God enlightens all Men and as he is God and the heavenly Man he enlivens and quickens the true Believers and regenerates them into his own heavenly Image 1 Cor. 15. 45. Psal. 119. 25 37 40 50 88 93 147 154 Verses And I am sure R. B. and the People called Quakers are so far from opposing or denying this Gospel-truth that both they and he do sincerely own believe and confess it See R. B.'s own Testimony in his Works quoted fol. 11. where he expresly saith Christ is near unto every one for in him we live and move and have our being and this nearness of his unto all Men in a day is more i. e. to them than the general presence in respect whereof he abides with all the works of his hands forasmuch as he is in them to enlighten them that they may believe John 1. 9 c. Whence 't is plain that here he owns Christ and even as God also to be that true Light in all Men. And likewise in fol. 63. R. B. owns even what his opposer grants namely That the Light is in all Men and that Christ is in all Men in so far as his Light is in all Men confessing Christ's Light to be in all Men even in such as are not in Union with him adding That where the Light is there is Christ the Donator of it which is all we say Thus far R. B. And in fol. 64. he confesseth An universal manifestation of the Holy Spirit in every one and that he that believeth in the Light believeth in Christ for where the Light of Christ is there is Christ himself compared with fol. 66. Thus far R. B. Wherein I hope J. N. and he are agreed viz. That this Divine Light in Man is of the very Nature Substance and Essence of God and his dear and only begotten Son Jesus Christ. And therefore I wish J. N. would be so charitable and tender as not to study either to make or widen Differences or Breaches in point of Judgment where they are not in reality if Matters be impartially and truly lookt into and compared 3. But R. B. supposes a Spiritual Body of Christ or Principle which says he we call Vehiculum Dei wherein God as Father Son and Spirit dwells or appear in Man as he understands and what then is this either to deny God or a Light of his Divine Essence to be in Man when it grants God both as Father Son and Spirit to be in such a Divine Principle as is in Man yea that Christ the Eternal Word which was with God and was God thus dwells in us fol. 334. which R. B. adds to the words before cited by J. N. against him wherein he truly supposes that Christ as in a Seed or in such a Love or Mediatory appearance in Men may be pressed crucified and slain as to them who are said to crucifie the Lord of Life afresh unto themselves yet not as to his own intire Existence or Being nor as he is the Omnipotent God for tho' Christ be a Lamb and aspersed and crucified to many by their Iniquities he is also a Lion and hath power to stir up his strength even in Man when he pleases And for the Seed of Eternal Life to be sown in us and that the Lord would raise up his Power in us these are not new nor uncouth Expressions but prayed for even in the Liturgy of the Church of England As to his words which we call Vehiculum Dei speaking of the Spiritual Body of Christ I conceive he speaks in condescention in the Person of some of the learned Writers or Philosophers who have used those Terms and not in the Person of the People called Quakers who are not only esteem'd an illiterate People but are a plain simple innocent People who most affect plain Scripture-Language without any School Glosses or Nice Distinctions to deck adorn or illustrate their Christian Profession of Christ or of his Divine Light within and many Thousands may not understand the terms Vehiculum Dei Intermediate Being nor the word Idea's so much used by J. N. Nor is Jesus Christ Preacht among us under those terms but in Scripture-terms both as he is truly God and as he is the one Mediator between God and Men even the Man Christ Jesus as having an inward sight sense and knowledge of him by his Divine Light Spirit Life and Power so as we shall not need to fall out about the Names thereof but prize the Excellency of the Knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord above all the World's Wisdom natural and acquired Knowledge and Learning for in him are all the hidden Treasures of true Wisdom and Knowledge We who are a plain simple-hearted People who are content with what God has bestowed upon us are not willing to trouble our heads with curious Notions nor with intricate school Definitions and Distinctions about Words and Names having an inward feeling of the principal thing the root of the matter intended 5. Concerning R. B.'s speaking of the Spiritual Body of Christ as a heavenly invisible and Divine Principle and believing God as Father Son and Spirit dwells therein and are to be known and received therein I think J. N. has no great reason to differ with him therein much less to suppose thence that he or we conclude the Divine Light or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mention'd Joh. 1. but a meer Creature And considering that Doctrin of the Spiritual Body of Christ is that which R. B. intends in all his Discourse of that Subject J. Norris himself cannot oppose but rather grants the probability thereof and then where 's the Controversie For which take a view of his own words p.
38. 1st Treat viz. Whether there be any such thing as Vehiculum Dei or Spiritual Body of Christ which is a Notion several learned Men both before and since the appearance of Quakerism have entertain'd upon the reading the 6th Chapter of St. John I have neither Cause nor Mind at present to dispute p. 38. 1st Treat And to the same purpose he writes more fully and ingeniously in his second Treatise p. 17. Which therefore I may here recite in his own words viz. And here in the first place I shall be so free and ingenuous as to declare that I shall not stand with them concerning any of the Five first Propositions which may be all true for ought I know to the contrary Particularly I shall not stand with them concerning the Spiritual Body of Christ as distinct from that Natural Body wherein he was incarnate of the Virgin Mary There may be such a thing for ought I know or am able to shew to the contrary and I know that several among the Ancients have been of this opinion alledging for its foundation the sixth Chapter of St. John which to confess the truth seems to favour it not a little And this Hypothesis has been of late to the great surprise and amusement of the stiffer and severer sort of Divines re-advanced by a person of singular Note and Eminence in our Church who makes use of it to salve and maintain the Doctrin of the Real Presence supposing that while the Bodies of the Communicants feed upon the grosser Elements of Bread and Wine their Souls as many of them as are fitly disposed do take in and feed upon this Divine and Spiritual Body of Christ which strengthens and nourishes their Inner Man and becomes to them a Principle of Regeneration and Spiritual Life as you may see more fully deduced in his Discourse of the Real Presence particularly in the first and sixth Chapters of that Treatise I shall not therefore I say contend with them concerning the Spiritual Body of Christ either as to its Existence or as to this its Use whether there be such thing or whether it be the Principle of Regeneration and Spiritual Life to the Saints They may be both true for ought I know I see nothing absurd or so much as improbable in them and as I do not surrender up my full assent to what I cannot demonstrate to be true so neither do I care to run down and condemn such Principles which I cannot prove to be false Thus far J. N. It may not be amiss here to insert those 5 first Propositions before mentioned which he has supposed from our friend R. B. c. and which he declared he shall not stand with us concerning any of them for that they may be all true for ought he knows to the contrary Prop. 1. p. 14 15. They meaning the Quakers suppose that the Spiritual Life or the Life of Holiness and Grace is a Substantial Life even as the Life of Vegetation the Life of Sensation and the Life of Reason are all substantial 2. They suppose that this Substantial Life is by the Vital Union of the Soul with some body or other 3. They suppose that this Body in the Vital Union of the Soul with which Spiritual Life does consist is a certain Divine or Celestial Body even as the Natural Life does consist in the Vital Union of the Soul with a Natural or Terrestrial Body of the common Elementary Consistence 4. They suppose that Christ had two Bodies of a distinct Original and of a different Contexture c. a Body which he took from the Virgin Mary and a Body in which his Soul existed long before he took flesh of the Virgin These are the very words of Mr. Barclay To the Question of his adversary Had Christ two Bodies He answers Yes and let him deny it if he dare without contradicting the Scripture Joh. 6. 58. Christ speaks of his flesh which came down from Heaven but this was not the Flesh he took from the Virgin Mary for that came not down from Heaven but he had a Spiritual Body in which his Soul existed long before he took Flesh of the Virgin 5. They suppose that this latter the Spiritual Body of Christ is that Divine or Celestial Body in the Vital Union of the Soul with which our Spiritual Life or our Life of Grace does consist c. That this is that heavenly Manna that living Bread discoursed of in the 6th of St. John that Divine Aliment upon which the Saints do feed and whereby they are nourished unto Everlasting Life Obj. The premises of the whole foregoing matters seriously considered and compared where 's the great difference between J. N. and R. B. 1. The one confesseth the Divine Substantial Essence and Nature of the Deity to be that Light which is in Men. The other confesseth God as Father Son and Spirit to be the Light in Men and to be in that Seed Principle or Spiritual Body of Christ which is in some degree in all Men. 2. The one confesseth the Divine Light of the Word that was with God to be in all Men. The other confesseth Christ who is that Word to be in all Men in some measure 3. The one confesseth the Spiritual Body of Christ consequently Christ's being in that Body The other cannot deny it but rather assents to it 4. Both confess the Light of Christ within to be a Divine Substantial Light and Truth 5. They differ not about the Divine Essence of the Light as being of the Nature and Being of God and Christ as he is the Divine Word or Logos but somewhat about the mode or manner of its Being Discovery and Reception as in Man The one supposeth the very Essence and Substance of the Deity to be intimately united to our Minds And the other that 't is in us as in a Medium i. e. in the Spiritual Body of Christ which is rather assented unto than opposed or in and through Christ as Mediator for therein he is God's Servant most eminent and our Saviour See Isai. 42. 1 6 7. ch 49. 6. ch 52. 13. 53. 11. Zech. 3. 8. 6. But the main difference is That J. N. dislikes and condemns is in R. B. and G. K. their making the Spiritual Body of Christ to be the Light within p. 18. Treat 2d Concerning which and his saying That not even the Soul of Jesus Christ much less his Spiritual Body can ever be a Light to the Mind of Man p. 23. Treat 2d I ask him if any spiritual part of Jesus Christ wherein he is received and knowable in Man can be truly said to be no Light to the Mind or Soul of Man How then says Christ himself I am the Light of the World I am the Way the Truth and the Life No man cometh unto the Father but by me Joh. 14. I could draw strange consequences on J. N. in this matter but chuse at present to be sparing To