not sent to Baptize as an Apostle is to say Paul was not sent to preach as an Apostle except Paul had one Commission to preach and another to Baptize seeing that Commission hinted at in Matthew requires both besides is not this to devide Paul or rather Christ in Paul that he did some things ministerially as an Apostle and other things as a Disciple as if he were sometimes an Apostle and no Disciple and sometimes a Disciple and no Apostle or that Paul should dissemble with the Corinthians to write to them as an Apostle and to thank God that he had Baptized no more but those few he names and gives this reason for it because he was not sent to Baptize but to preach the Gospel when as by thy own confession he was sent as he was a Disciple to Baptize as well as others and knew it as well as James Pope if it had been so and had not Paul by removing one block out of the way viz. preventing a jealousie least he should be thought to Baptize in his own name laid a greater stumbling block in the way viz. to slight the Ordinance of Baptism and all those that should Baptize with water though as Disciples Paul not explaining his meaning to be as James Pope saith it was viz. that he meant as an Apostle he was not sent but as a Disciple he might did and might not Paul as well have left off preaching to prevent the jealousie of preaching in his own name as well as Baptizing seeing one was commanded in the Commission as well as the other was or might have been idolized as well as Baptizing but in truth Paul had no more Command to Baptize with water then to Circumcise yet he did both upon occasion to remove stumbling blocks and to strengthen the weak and all for the furtherance of the Gospel And Christs calling them Disciples in one place after he had once chosen them hinders them not from being Apostles no more then his calling them Apostles in another place hinders them from being Disciples for sometimes he called them by the name of Disciples and sometimes by the name of Apostles as Luke 22.14 And when the hour was come he sate down and the twelve Apostles with him and this was before he sent them forth in Mat. 28. but is not this a new invention saying that Paul as a Disciple was sent but not as an Apostle seeing the old cover is found out to be too narrow viz. that Paul was not sent so much to Baptize as to preach and therefore where it is said not sent is meant say some not so much as labour not for the bread that perisheth c. that is say some not so much for bread that perishes but you not being able to prove that Paul was sent at all to baptize with water but it may be easily proved that to labour at all is not onely lawful but commanded but that Paul was sent at all to Baptize with water yet remains to be proved and to say that he did Baptize with water and therefore was sent proves no more that he was sent to Baptize with water then because he did Circumcise proves he was sent to Circumcise but in thy saying it belonged not to Pauls Office and therefore he might leave it in this thou hast truly concluded that a man may be sent of God as Paul was and yet not Baptize with water as not belonging to his Office and for this ingenious confession of thine I may as truly confess to thee also that there are many that do Baptize with water who are not sent by God so to do and of this thy Brethren may take notice how thou thy self hast answered the Objection which is so often made by them and seems to lie so much in their way viz. if we that are called Quakers were led by the same spirit that the Primitive Saints were led by surely then we would do the same things that they did as to practise water Baptism c. Which Objection thou hast answered to the satisfaction of the Objectors in that thou hast found out a man sent of God and led by his Spirit and yet might lawfully let water Baptism alone to others as not belonging to his Office 2. The next Query propounded is whether the outward washing with water which is but the shadow and Johns Baptism or the inward washing or cleansing by the Spirit which is the Baptism of Christ Which of these I say is that one Baptism that Paul wrote of Or why writes he but of one there if both might be continued To this Query thou answerest like one altogether ignorant of the Spirits Baptism like those Baptists in Acts 19.2 onely with this difference thou hast read there is a Holy Ghost and a Baptism so called of which they had not heard but thou hast read and like them hast been it may be Baptized with Johns Baptism who indeed Baptized with water but he of whom John bore witness Baptized with a better Baptism who was to increase but John and his water Baptism was to decrease for John was sent to prepare his way In thy answer to the Query thou saist There are three Conclusions First that it is but a shadow Secondly that it is Johns Baptism Thirdly that the washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism To the first thou saist thou shalt let it pass to the second thou propounds a question and then follows with a second question whether John were a Minister of the Law or Gospel and then thou further Queries Whether there were any other difference between Johns and Christs then that one taught and prepared for Christ to come and the other taught to believe in him that was already come c. What shuffling is here to avoid a plain question viz. in short which is no more then for thee to answer what that one Baptism is which Paul speaks of whether it be water or the Spirits Baptism And if both were to continue why writes he but of one And to answer this plain Question thou asks Questions and propounds further Queries as if the way to resolve one Question were to propound two others or as if to answer one Query were further to Query but it is commonly the answer of him or them that have no further nor better answer to return But thou further answers in the third place and saist Whereas it is implied that the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism I do not know that any Scripture calls it Christs Baptism or Baptism at all c. Thou mightest have left out this thirdly except it had been on purpose to manifest thy ignorance of the Scripture and Spirits Baptism thou needs not have said I do not know that the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism For what difference is there between inward washing by the Spirit and inward Baptizing by the Spirit is it not all
one onely one is translated into English and the other is left in Greek untranflated And so whilst thou saist thou dost not know that any Scripture calls it Christs washing or baptism confesses and calls it inward washing thy self so that by thy own confession there is no more difference between the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit and Christs baptism then there is between baptizing in Greek and washing in English which is all one and the word baptism might as well have been translated washing in all places of the Scripture as in one place had it not made for the upholding of the Trade of the Translators and for the continuing of much idolatry and ignorance in the world and whereas thou sayest it is not called Christs Baptism what Baptism was that the Apostles speak of 1 Cor. 12.13 For by one spirit are we all baptized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles and what Baptism was that which Paul speaks of Rom. 6.3 4. by which they were baptized into Christ and into his death and were buried with Christ by Baptism and by it planted into the likeness of his death whereby they knew that the old man was crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed that henceforth they might not serve sin for he that was thus dead and buried with Christ was free from sin which your water doth not do nay do not you who are washed with water plead against freedom from sin and say it is not attainable in this world and therefore it is strongly to be suspected that as your Baptism is wrong so is your faith also seeing the Scripture saith as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and put off the old man with his deeds by being planted into the likeness of his death and by being buried with him by Baptism and in the 1 Cor. 6.11 where the Apostle saith they were washed and sanctified and justified by the spirit c. what difference is there by being washed or cleansed by the spirit and by being baptized by the spirit seeing washing and Baptizing is all one and if thou wert come to the full assurance of faith and knewest what it was to have thy heart sprinkled from an evil conscience then thou wouldst know what that pure water was with wch the Saints had their bodies washed Heb. 10.22 But thou concludest that Christs Baptism is not now in being because those tongues and miracles thou speaks of are not in being that thou know of and so justifies thy self that the one baptism is meant water baptism Christs baptism or the Baptism of the spirit was some extraordinary thing and was to confer upon them a larger measure of gifts fitting then to spread the Gospel c. and therefore one principal gift bestowed by that Baptism was the gift of tongues to this I spake before about fire Baptism as in Acts the second and saith other places both before in the sixth page and now but names none by which I conclude thou hast no place to prove the Holy Ghosts Baptism thou speaks of but that of Acts 2. and what ground thou hast to call that fire Christs Baptism or the Baptism promised that Christ should come withal I know not since there is not one word in that second of the Acts at the beginning that speaks of Baptism where it is said there came a sound from Heaven as of a rushing mighty wind and it filled all the house where they were sitting And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire and it sate upon each of them and they were all filled with the Ghost and began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance Where is this called the Baptism of Christ or the Baptism of the Holy Ghost the word Baptism is no more named here neither in Greek nor English and yet this thou wouldst have by all means to be the only Baptism of the Holy Ghost promised and some other places where both the word Baptism in Greek and the word washing in English is spoken off must not be the Baptism of the spirit that was promised and was to continue when outward water was to cease but why should thou speak of miracles and tongues so much seeing tongues were for a sign not for them which believed but for them which believed not and thou accounts thy self a believer 1 Cor. 14.22 But James Pope why dost thou seem to grant inward washing and cleansing by the spirit to be a washing or Baptism of the spirit seeing thou hast spent so much time to prove inward washing and cleansing to be none of the spirits baptism and yet sums up the query thy self in these words whether the Baptism of water or the inward washing and cleansing by the spirit be the one Baptism which Paul writs of or why writs he but of one if both must be continued to which thou grants both must be continued and yet saith it is water Baptism he writs of So that thou seems to grant what thou wouldst deny and to deny what thou wouldst grant but thou art in a strait and truth is too hard for thee for if thou grant the spirits Baptism to continue then thy water Baptism must down because there is but one and therefore of the two thou hadst rather the spirits Baptism should cease then thine and yet if thou should deny inward baptizing or cleansing to be out of use then thou wert no Christian and therefore thou hast sowed as good a covering together as fig leaves will make to hide thy nakedness withal and to save thy water Baptism and thinks to do it by calling inward baptizing with the Holy Ghost inward cleansing and washing by the spirit and so sets up two words to contend each with other whilst thou thereby thinkest to amaze the Reader that thou may escape with thy water to be the one Baptism that is to continue and yet in thy first answer saith both must continue inward Baptism because no entrance into the Kingdom without it and water must continue because it is Christs Ordinance fitted to the New Testament as Circumcision was to the Old In thy next Book James prove it an Ordinance commanded by Christ to be practiced after his Ascention in plain words and not by an invented consequence least you are found guilty of that for which you condemned the Priests of England viz. for proving their Baptism by a consequence and will not this be much to your shame to have your Commision to prove by a consequence and not by plain and positive Scripture for a Commissioner by consequence onely is no Commissioner But James me thinks thou comes too near the Priests of England in bringing Circumcision and Baptism together dost thou not lay thy self open to some disadvantage in this was one Ordinance a type of another or one figure a type of another figure what confusion is here is not this Priests
hath part in the first Resurrection over him the second death shall have no power and he is willing that the doctrine of the Resurrection of the body of Christ as the first fruits of the Resurrection of the bodies of the Saints should be perpetuated though some say now of such as once was said of Paul Acts 17. that he was a setter forth of strange gods because he Preached unto them Jesus and the Resurrection and this query doth not altogether excuse the Author from that spirit but James here is three things for thee to prove by plain Scripture and not by thy consequences least thou be guilty of that which you of your way have charged upon the Priests 1. To prove Christ commanded water baptism since his Resurrection 2. To prove that his servants practiced it by vertue of that command after his Resurrection 3. That he commanded outward washing to be practiced after his Resurrection in memorial of his Resurrection and that the practitioners did it so accordingly all which thou seems to affirm in thy query and to take it for granted and then a more particular answer to them all thou mayest receive according to the Scripture of Truth Q. 4. Whether those that deny the Ordinance of breaking bread as it was instituted by Christ and practiced by his Primitive Saints are willing the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed should remain among his Saints until his next coming Answ Those who deny any Ordinance or institution of Christ to those of whom he required it and to that end for which he appointed it as the cause of his requiring it at their hands are transgressors and are not willing that the end or cause of his commanding it should be fulfilled or accomplished nor do not wait or look for his appearing the second time without sin unto salvation but believe they are saved though they commit sin and believe that freedom from all sin they can never attain while living in this visible world and such are not onely unwilling that the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed should remain among his Saints but are both ignorant and unbelieving that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses all that know it and believe in it from all unrighteousness and presents them perfect unto God without spot or wrinkle or any such thing and such onely as thus believe celebrate the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed as are dead with Christ and such are free from sin and such though they neither eat bread nor drink wine but feed upon locust and wild hony or are content with a dinner of green herbs such I say do truely shew forth the Lords death in their conformity to it and his blood shed in that their hearts are sprinkled from an evil conscience to serve the living God in truth and righteousness Q. 5. Whether those that say that Scripture 1 Cor. 11.26 is meant of Christs coming in Spirit do not in effect say that the Ordinance of breaking of bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation till Christ come to them in Spirit Answ Was it not in the same night in which he was betrayed that he took bread and is not Christ a spirit and his coming in spirit or doth he come out of the spirit or is there a coming of Christ and not in the spirit is Christ and the spirit divided or can he come and he not in the spirit and the spirit in him and where Christ is present is not the spirit there also and he in it and it in him and yet but one And doth it at all follow in sound judgement or good understanding that they who say the 1 Cor. 11.26 is meant of Christs coming in spirit must needs or in effect say that the Ordinance of breaking bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation till Christ come to them in spirit any more then it follows that the Disciples had no power at all because they were commanded to wait at Jerusalem for the promise of the Father and that they should receive power after the Holy Ghost was come upon them Acts 1.4.8 ver or any more then it may be said of Christ that his words implyed or that he in effect said that his Disciples had not his spirit at all in them and so were none of his when he said to them in these words how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy spirit to them that ask him Luke 11.13 and yet all that time God was their Father and they could not ask aright without the spirit and yet Christ saith how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy spirit to them that ask him so do they who say that the coming of Christ in 1 Cor. 11.26 is his coming in spirit in effect say any more or otherwise that those had not the spirit at all or were unbelievers to whom Christ said take eat this is my body which is broken for you c. because they were to wait for a further and fuller manifestation of him in them and he went away in that fleshly appearance that he might come again unto them and abide with them for ever and this Christ prayed for and performed accordingly John 17.23 I in them and thou in me that they may be made perfect in one c. so that to say till he come is meant of Christs coming in spirit doth no more deny or in effect say that the breaking of bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation c. then Christ in saying the Father would give his holy Spirit to them that ask him in effect said that God would give his holy Spirit to them that asked or prayed without the Spirit or then Christ in effect said that they who waited in their wills and in the form without the power should receive power after the Holy Ghost was come upon them or then in effect Christ should say they had not the holy Spirit at all as yet because it was to come upon them and so till he come though meant of his coming in Spirit yet doth not follow but those to whom Christ spake had a measure of his Spirit already come to them and was in them and so commanded them not to eat and drink damnation but by eating of that bread and drinking of that cup they were to shew the Lords death till he come and then when he was come who was shewed by that eating and drinking the shew needed no longer the thing shewed being come and witnessed the bread indeed and drink indeed was known and Eternal life inherited Q. 6. Whether it is not granted by those that seem to deny it that the forecited place directs the Church at Corinth to the use of an Ordinance seeing some might eat this bread and drink this cup which is also called flesh and blood unworthily but those that eat truly that flesh that is meat indeed and drink that blood
endeavoured to make outward water to be may be easily seen by the upright in heart who saith not onely it must continue because fitted to the New Testament as Circumcision was to the Old and so in like manner as the Teachers of Circumcision thrust in that upon the bewitched Galatians and said except they were Circumcised they could not be saved do not all you whose judgement this is do the same concerning your water when you say It is fitted to the New Testament as Circumcision was to the Old And do not you make Proselites by your outward water as they did by Circumcision But as if this were not enough thou saist Outward water is that one Baptism spoken of by Paul joined with the one Faith one Lord and the one God as if that outward water either lets into the union with Christ or the want of it makes void the union and yet you say in words that union with Christ must precede and fit the subject before a right can be to water and yet what it should be that should make you cry up water so much I know not seeing you have no positive Command by Christ in plain words for it except through the cunning craftiness of the old serpent who gives leave to cry up and to rest upon any thing that is outward on purpose to busie the mind upon and to blind the eye from looking at or upon any thing revealed within that onely can give the knowledge of God in Christ and manifests to the Souls its union with and compleatness in Christ Jesus both as to the true Circumcision and Baptism Col. 2.11 12. The next Question thou saist Thou understands not which was whether such do truly discern the Lords body eat his flesh and drink his blood who do imagine of the flesh blood and bones of Christ as the Jews did And yet as if thou wert concerned in the Query though thou understand it not as thou saist will return some kind of answer to it which is not the part of a wise man to give an answer to that which he positively saith he understands not as thou dost but thy answer makes it manifest that thou art not sensible of that fond imagination which runs in the minds of filthy creatures who defile the flesh for thou saist If it be meant of the believing Jews who did believe that Christ rose from the dead with his flesh and bones as himself testifies such may truly discern the Lords hody eat his flesh and drink his blood c. Doth not this answer savour of a Jew outward Or art thou mistaken as thou wast in thy former quotation when as there is neither Chap. nor vers to be found so in this also seeing thou names onely flesh and bones and the Query was flesh and blood and bones as a real man hath or dost thou imagine of Christ that he had or hath flesh and bones onely and no blood like a real man If so speak plainly in thy next Book that I may know thy Opinion in this particular and name thy proof or if it be the Errata of the Printer let thy next be rectified that thou hadst forgotten to put down the blood and so I may pass it by for the present To the next Question which is whether that flesh which is meat indeed and that blood which is drink indeed be not spiritual and that which quickneth and nourisheth up to eternal life all those that feed thereon To this thou confesseth but cannot know it but in the light no more then the Jews did who said how can this man give us his flesh to eat And it is as hard a saying now as it was then though easilier confest now because it is written and may be read To the last Query which is What is that flesh that profiteth nothing And what is that flesh after which Christ was once known yet henceforth know we him so no more To which thou returns this answer Christ in John 6.63 shews that it is the Spirit that quickneth and therefore without that all is without profit whatever is done in the flesh without the Spirit and so if you take it of being implyed in Ordinances with the flesh or outward man onely it profiteth nothing This is thy answer to the first part of the Query viz. What is that flesh which profiteth nothing Can any wise man take this for an answer to the Question or is it not a declining the Question and answering to another Question of thy own framing As if thou had been asked whether that worship that is performed in the flesh or outward man onely without the Spirit of God profiteth or not If this had been the Question then thou hadst returned an answer somewhat pertinent but the Question that thou was to answer to was What is that flesh that profiteth nothing Considering what the foregoing Question was and thy answer to it viz. that there is a flesh that is spiritual and doth nourish to eternal life all those that feed thereon then comes this Question in the next words as depending upon the foregoing Question and what then is that flesh that profiteth nothing seeing there is flesh that nourishes up to eternal life But thou in stead of giving an answer what flesh it is that profiteth nothing tells a story of what ever is born in the flesh or outward man without the Spirit profits not c. A Child that reads his Primer might have said so much by rote out of the Catechism and yet thou quotes John 6.63 as if thy answer were intended to that place of Scripture as if thou didst believe the Question was grounded upon that place which answer of thine doth manifest as if Christ were speaking in this place of worshipping in the flesh without the Spirit and instructing his Disciples that the worshipping in the flesh without the Spirit profiteth nothing which thing though true in it self yet not true in this place as being the thing Christ was at this time teaching his Disciples for he was here rather rectifying and informing of them aright seeing they seemed to be prejudiced at Christs foregoing words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood and saying at the 57. ver he that eateth me even he shall live by me and at the 58. ver This is that bread which came down from Heaven not as your fathers did eat Manna and are dead he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever and at the 60. ver Many therefore of his Disciples when they heard this said This is an hard saying Who can hear it When Jesus knew in himself that his Disciples murmured at it he said unto them Doth this offend you What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are life So that it is manifest Christs drift and scope in
and none can be in the truth and most truely live above the way ordained of God to life neither can any live above the way and yet be in the truth and therefore thy query is an unlearned question and manifests thy ignorance of the mysteries of Christ Q. 9. Whether if those who despised Moses Law died without mercy under two or three witnesses ought not those then that either in word practice or writing despise Christs Law to be deeply humbled and truely repent of so grievous a sin especially if they have taught others so do Answ I hope that is not the English of thy query viz. that thou wouldst have them more sorely punished that deny your water washing then those were that despised Moses Law Those who despise Christs Law ought to be deeply humbled and repent of it and turn from it or they cannot be saved and such are all those who despise the true light with which every man that cometh into the world is lighted and call it natural for Christ is a Law-giver and gives Laws to his children as Moses did to the Jews and his Laws and Ordinances are onely known and read in the true light and he which opposes or gain-says either in himself or others the manifestation of the Spirit which is given to every man to profit withall is an unprofitable servant unto God though he be found in all the outward practices of the true Church for God is a Spirit and they which worship him aright must worship in the Spirit and in the truth for such God did seek to worship him in the dayes of the Apostles and such God is seeking again and all others shall be discovered and cast out as dung upon the face of the earth and such despisers shall behold and wonder and by their mocking at the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world shall their bonds become strong and their punishment become sorer then those who despised Moses Law if they speedily repent not 10 Q. Whether it will be a good Plea at the dreadful day of Christ to say Lord we would not have despised thy Laws if thou hadst made them to our minds and we had thought they had been spiritual enough Answ It will be no good Plea at the dreadful day of Christ neither is it now to say Lord we would not have despised thy Laws if thou hadst made them to our minds and we had thought they had been spiritual enough and of this sort are all those who put the day of the Lord afar off and are of the night and know not the day of the Lord as yet to be dawned nor the day-star to be risen in their hearts but though they draw near with their lips their hearts are far from God and their minds are estranged from him by wicked works though in words they confess him yet they are but in their thoughts and think they stand sure but their foundation is rottenness and built upon the sands like all those who say and do not and hear his words but obey them not and cry the Temple of the Lord and Church-fellowship and Ordinances but hate to be Reformed and to have their conversation ordered aright and so cannot see Gods Salvation while they account that too low and carnal or legal and natural which checks and reproves for sin in the Conscience and accuses for evil and excuses when they do well and reject it and slight it as not spiritual enough and such are they thy Query speaks of had they known that the light in their Consciences had been spiritual and that which came from Christ the light of the world and given them to lead out of darkness and that with which they must come to see themselves lost and undone if ever they be saved and in the sight and sence of their miserable estate to wait for a Saviour and in that light to see him revealed to save when none can help or deliver I say this is the man and the woman that in truth thy Query speaks of that shall say Lord we would not have despised thy Laws if thou hadst made them to our minds or if they had been spiritual enough but the light in the Conscience we liked not because it alwayes bore a witness for God against all our evil wayes and now we marvel not that every one that doth evil hates it because it reproves them all but outward Observances and bodily Exercises we like well and in these Observations we look for the Kingdom of Heaven to come but to give up to be guided by the light in our Consciences and shines in our hearts for that to give us the knowledge of God in the face of Christ we like not but accounted it not sufficient to lead to Christ and that which prejudiced us the more against the light which shines in our hearts and hath long shewed us our evil words before we spake them and our thoughts when they first did arise in us before we consented to them to follow them was because we accounted it common to all men and that which every man had and that though it shewed some sins against the Law yet not all sins against the Gospel as unbelief and therefore slighted it as legal and natural and when it troubled us or reproved us when we had been worshipping of thee O Lord as we thought in breaking bread and drinking wine and preaching and praying and the like which we verily believed had been thy ordinances and appointments and when we were troubled in our spirits and minds after such exercises as these we looked upon it as the temptation of the Devil and did not know it to be Gods witness in our Consciences or his Spirit striving with us to bring us to silence that so we might know the dumb to speak and the Spirit of the Lord to move and stir and guide in us and we in all things to be led by it and so in all we did feel Gods acceptance by the Testimony of his Spirit in us even the Spirit it self bearing witnesse with our spirits that we were Gods Children and the Spirit of truth to lead us into all truth that so by it we might witness freedom from the inward troubles of our minds and spirits and the accusings of Gods witness in our Consciences and so be made free and perfect as pertaining to the Conscience by the blood of Christ which is onely known and felt in his light as the Scripture saith 1 John 1.7 If we walk in the light as he is in the light we have fellowship one with another and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin But we looked on that of God in our Consciences to be too low and of the reliques of the old Adam or something of the Law but we looked upon our selves as not being under the Law but under grace and so judged our selves in Christ and when we were at