A Further DISCOVERY of that Generation of men called QVAKERS By way of Reply to an Answer of James Nayler to the Perfect Pharisee Wherein is more fully layd open their Blasphemies notorious Equivocations Lyings wrestings of the Scripture Raylings and other detestable Principles and Practises And the Booke called The Perfect Pharisee is convincingly cleared from James Naylers false Aspersions with many difficult Scriptures by him wrested opened Published for the building up of the perseverance of the Saints till they come to the end of their Faith even the salvation of their soules Mat. 16.18 Vpon this Rocke I will build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it Rev. 2.23 Vnto you I say and unto as many as have not this Doctrine and which have not knowne the depths of Satan as they speake I will put upon you none other burden But that which you have already hold fast till I come Gateside Printed by S. B. 1654. Christian Reader Sâ—nce our Publishing of the Perfect Pharisee as we finde we blesse God it hath been prosperous to the no small satisfaction and establishing of his people who with an humble and sober spirit have been willing to try the spirits whether they be of God So we see it hath provoked the spirits of those Quakers to more obstinacy bitternesse and rayling As in the powring out of the fourth Vioâ— Men were scorched with great heat and blasphemed the Name of God and repented not to give him glory Now though truely we must professe with Reverend Mr. Eaton Writing concerning the same people in his Epistle to his Booke called The Quakers confuted That we cannot apprehend that there is any hope of convincing these persons of the error of their way so farre are they under the very power of the spirit of delusion and professed enmity to the Ordinances of Christ Jesus our Lord Yet for the further securing and fuller satisfying of the people of God we are induced to Answer this Reply of Iames Nayler for the clearer manifesting of the wickednesse and folly of these men and their Principles And though it cost us new revilings and more bitter cursings from this People which we fully expect Yet what are we and our Names though troddon under foot so Iesus Christ may have the glory and his people the advantage of our standing for the truth But that thou mayest know the nature of their Answer thus it is We charge them to hold seventeen Blasphemous and Hereticall Doctrines besides their other principles and practises in our Booke expressed and what he sayes to them we have given thee a short account in the Draught subjoyned to our Epistle Wherein thou wilt easily see with what full proofe we have testified those things concerning them though the tongues of these 〈◊〉 accustomed to nothing more then to rayle doe so confidently charge lyes upon us But we are sure and confident in the Lord that we have spoken that of them which will if not already as it doth to all impartiall Readers fully undeniably and convincingly appeare to be truth if thou reade the clearenesse of the evidence of this ensuing Treatise Reader If thou hast Read our former Booke thou wilt finde our Arguments and assertions against the blasphemous Doctrines of these men fully strengthened by plentifull variety of evident plaine convincing Scriptures to which thou wilt finde Iames Nayler in his Reply answering not one word Certainly the demonstration of the spirit of God either hath convincingly silenced him and stopp'd his mouth for how ready is he to catch at any trifling appearance of advantage or what canst thou or any man imagine of him but that Scripture is nothing to him nor his soule under any obedience unto or conscience of the truth of God either of which What a miserable and deplorable state of soule doth it speake when men can stand out in their blaspemies against the light of Conscience It shall be our worke in this ensuing Treatise in following Iames Nayler in his Reply to answer all such Scriptures as he impertinently and injuriously wrests and to cleare the truths of God from their being misapplyed to his horrid Principles By which and other occasionall passages in this Booke thou wilt find a more full and plaine manifestation of these men and discovery of the mystery of iniquity working in them Consider what thou Readest and the Lord give thee understanding in all things Tho. Weld Rich. Prideaux Sam. Hammond Will. Cole Will. Durant A short Draught of James Naylers Answer to the Booke called The Perfect Pharisee Quakers Positions 1. EQuality with God This we proved by six Evidences He denyes but two of them which yet we shall prove under the hand of witnesses and his very Answers doe amount to an asserting of it 2. No distinction of Persons in the God-head This is denyed by them but we shall by further testimony cleare it to be theirs 3. That the soule is a part of the Divine Essence This he excepteth not against nor takes any notice of our Arguments but is full of bitter Rayling 4. That Christ is in every man and in the Reprobates held under corruption This is confessed clearely though seemingly denyed onely one expression is shuffled which is yet proved by testimony under hand 5. That Christ was but a Figure and Example This is denyed by him and miserably shuffled yet we evidently prove it even by their owne Bookes and other testimony 6. That men are not justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ in his owne Person fulfilled without us This is not denyed though so wicked a Doctrine but a new asserted and no tittle of an answer to our Arguments 7. That men are justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ within them enables to performe This we proved by six evident testimonies two of which Nayler onely shuffles in but we shall cleare them and answers nothing to plaine â—cripture against them 8. That God and Man cannot be wholly reconciled till he be brought to the state of the first Adam and able in hâ—â— oâ—ne power to stand perfect This he denyes but we prove from his owne words it clearely is and must be his â—eaning 9. He that commits sin and is not perfectly holy can never enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory This he denyes to be so in his Booke and rayleth as if we charged a lye upon him but we shall further cleare it though in his owne answer he partly confesseth it 10. No reall Saint but he that is perfectly holy c. This he confesseth and answers onely by rayling but takes no notice of the Scriptures against that Principle 11. Every man hath a light within him sufficient to guide him to salvation without the help of outward light He confesseth all but answers nothing 12. No need of outward teaching c. He denyes one testimony of ten which yet is true but confesseth the Doctrine and falls a rayling 13.
mayst observe he answers nothing and thereby see the spirit of those men that doe stop their eyes against the plainest light but he that hardeneth his heart shall not prosper Position 13. That the Scriptures are not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth He answers nothing according to his custome to our arguments nor excepts against our proofes but labours to confirme the Position Excep 1 Christ is the Word now if the Scriptures be the Word then there is two Words of God now prove that in Scripture or that the Letter is â—aked the Word in plaine words Reply 1. That Christ is the Word is plaine Iohn 1. and who knoweth it not The essentiall and declarative Word not all one 2. That the will of God contained in the Scripture is the Word of God is as plaine besides the Scriptures we named â—n the Perfect Pharisee pag. 24. Marke 7.13 Luke 11 28. Rom. 10.17 Iohn 12.48 we shall adde these Luke 8.11 the Seed is the Word of God ver 12. then commeth the Devill and taketh the word out of their heart least they should beleeve and be saved can the Devill take Christ out of their hearts 1 Thes 2.13 When yee receaved the Word of God which you heard of us yee received it not as the Word of Men but as it is in truth the Word of God c. This was the Word which the Apostles spake yea received it which cannot be meâ—nt of Christ he should have said yee received him not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God This is so plaine a case we shall not trouble thee further And here thâ—u mayst observe there are two words of God the essentiall and 〈◊〉 declarative and wonder the man should be so weake as to bid 〈◊〉 produce Scripture to prove this when the Scripture is so full of it to any that doth but reade it Excep 2 The Apostle calls what he wrote a Declaration 1 â—ohn 1.2.3 Reply How doth this prove the Scriptures are noâ— the word of God nay doth it not fully prove the contrary for that which he declares was what he had heard of the Lord Iesus Scriptures not onely a declaration of the conditions of Saints Againe we doe owne the Scriptures to be the declarative Word of God or a declaration of the minde of God but we say the Quakers doe destroy the Scriptures Divinity and authority when they call them onely a declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth For as we prâ—ved before 1 They shall be then no foundation for the Faith of Saints for one mans condition is not the foundation of another mans Faith 2. The Scripture shall have no authority over the soule of any but he that is in the same condition and hath experienced it contrary to Iohn 2.4 8. this is the reason why Nayler sayes they are not commanded to forbear to weare shâ—oes in his Book p. 21. if they were they should as well as they are commanded not to sâ—lute whereas that command if it be in any part binding Luke 10.4 requires both but this will tell thee what is meant by their calling Scripture a speaking forth of the Saints condition viz. it shall have no authority over them further then they list or have an impulse on their spirits or they practice for both the commands are of equall authâ—rity yet he denyes they are commanded one of them nay they are both in the same verse Luke 10.4 Yea 3. This destroyes the divine authority of all Historicall and Propheticall Scripture which could not be the Saints conditions when thâ—y spoke them as also threatnings and promises c But see this at large Perfect Pharisee pag. 24.25 We sha l say but this 1 Iohn 5.16 There is a sinne unto death I doe not say that you should pray for it was this Iohns condâ—â—ion when he spake it did he exper ence in his heart that he had sinned to death 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is returned to his vomit c. was this the condition of Peter that spoke it but we are ashamed of this wickednesse and folly of these men Excep 3 VVhereas you say it cannot be understood to be the word Christ that came to the Prophets Samuel Ieremy c it seems your understanding is not with the Apostle who saith It was the Spirit of Ch i st that was in them 1 Peter 1 11 and you say what Christ and his Apostles Preached c. was not Christ the Father or Spirit when as the Scripture saith Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. cap. 1 ver 21. Reply The Quakers grossâ— confounding of Christ with the written VVord 1 Consider Reader how grossely he abuseth and perverts the Scripture to prove that the words that they spoke were Christ and the spirit because it is said These holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost What a grosse and blasphemous conâ—ounding is here of the word that those men spoke and the holy Ghost that moved them to speake making the word spoken by a finite creature to be the everlasting spirit the holy Ghost The words were committed to Paper and Inke Rev. 1. Heb. 2.2 engraven in Tables 2 Cor. 3.7 Isay 30 8. write it before them in a Booke note it in a Booke c. can this be Christ or the Spirit of God and yet these are the things which they were moved of the holy Ghost to write Who knoweth not that it was the spirit of God that moved them to write that revealed the things they were to publish to the world but were those things that the holy Ghost moved them to write were those things Christ were those things the spirit What a miserable ignorance or judiciall blindnesse is this which certainely the righteous judgement of God hath given up this Generation of people to because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved Position 14. That the Spirits are not to be tryed by the Scriptures c. This Position is not denyed by Nayler we proved it from three testimonies and Nayler in his answer addes his owne defence thereof without exception against any of our proofes VVe shall take his arguments for defence thereof in order Excep 1 The infallible spirit which is the originall of all Scriptures is the tryall of all spirits and that spirituall man judgeth all things and by that spirit the Saints was to judge of all spirits and gave those up to Sathan that was for that end as is plaine 1 Cor. 5 4. Reply 1 The spirit not to be set in opposition to Scripture The force of this argument by which he would prove that spirits are not to be tryed by Scripture lyeth thus The infallible spirit is the tryall of all spirits therefore spirits are not to â—e tryed by Scriptures To
rake up a reason out of a heape of rayling this it is Those that doe uphold the Scriptures to be the tryall of Doctrines doe yet differ amongst themselves therefore the Spirits or Doctrines are not to be tryed in Scriptures Reply Quakers Popish argument This as many other of their answers is a knowne thread-bare Popish argument they say You Protestants cannot agree in your Discipline and therefore the Scriptures are not to be the judge of Doctrines but the infallible spirit of the Pope We hope God will discover them ere lonâ— to be men meerely acted by the spirit of Anti-christ but we shall give you a full answer under these two considerations Difference in non-fundamentals no prejudice to the Scriptures being judge of spirits 1. First as it reflects upon our selves We say to differ in discipline is not to worship severall gods as Nayler rayles while it is knowne we hold the head the Lord Jesus but this we looke upon as the spitting of his venome When Peter was for Circumcision and Paul was against Circumcision Gal. 2.13.14 did they worship severall gods So those Acts 15. that contested in different judgements did they worship severall gods But this man cares not what he sayes so be may throw his dirt upon us though he bewray his excessive ignorance in it before the world 2. As it fights against the Scriptures being the judge and tryall of spirits we shall shew there is no strength in this exception at all For the Scripture loseth not its authority for the tryall of spirits by reason of the darkenesse and different apprehensions of spirits How darke were the Apostles in the Prophesies of Christs Resurrection Luke 24 25. Fooles and flow of heart to beleeve all that the Prophets have spoken c. yet the Scriptures lost not their touchstone authority upon the account of their darkenesse though Christ saw thâ—t truth of the Resurrection in the Scriptures spoken of which they could not apprehend ought not Christ ver 26. to have sâ—ffoâ—ed these things and to enter into his glory Doth not Peter say plainely that in the writings of Paul there are 2 Pet 3.10 difficult things and hard to be understood and such as the unstable and unlearned rest and yet those Writings and Epist es doe not lose their authority because of the diversities and darkenesse of Beleevers thoughts Scripture rightly understood will clearely discover every spirit and every Doctrine though the best of men knowing but in part 1 Cor. 13.9 and so not fully taking in the genuine sense of Scripture may have through their darkenesse difference of judgement in things lesse fundamentall But we may be weary in following such triviall arguments onely we would not have the saints entrapped in any of Satans snares nor the blessed word that 's sweeter then hony and the hony combe subjected to the delusions of evill men Thus we have given thee the strength of his answer onely he addes his false glosse upon that of Isay 8.20 Isay 8.20 vindicated by us objected against them in the Perfect Pharisee the glosse is this Whereas you quote that place To the Law and to the testimony it is true the Law of the new Covenant is written in the heart by God and the testimody of Jesus is the spirit of Prophesie and if any be not guided by and speake according to these it is because they have no light in them but without them But we answer As he plainly by this overturnes all Scripture and leaves no rule but the Law written upon mens hearts which we have confuted in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 25. so it is a grosse perverting of the text and truth for it is clearely spoken of the Written Word and the very next words expresseth it clearely If they speake not according to this Word the Hebrew is full beyond exception cedabar hazzeh according to this Word so that that text is no reference that God makes to the Law written upon mens hearts but to the Law written in Tables of stone which tables were called the testimony and the Arke thereof called the Arke of the testimony Exod. 25.22 because the Tables of stone in which the Law was written called Exod. 31.18 the tables of the testimony were layd up there We have fully showne in the Booke called the Perfect Pharisee pag. 26. the sad fruits of this Doctrine of denying the Scripture to be the rule of trying doctrines and spirits that it is to open a gap to all the delusions of Satan and we instanced sin the knowne case of Iohn Gilpin who was sometimes a Quaker to which Nayler replyes onely thus It is no more then if the chiefe priests should have cited Iudas to confute Christ c. as he consulted with the priests to betray the truth so Iohn Gilpin hath done now who shall receive his reward and you priests also as Nayler sayes To which rayling we thus answer Shaking off the Sâ—ripture tâ—e â—â—ler to Satans delusions 1. That Iohn Gilpin was thus acted by the Devill is a known truth beyond questioning 2. That he did verily beleeve he was acted by Christ when yet the Devill acted him is very apparant Nay Atkinson the boy that pretends to answer that reâ—ation of Gilpin doth all along confesse that he was acted by the Devill is plaine to any that reades that his childish â—nd non-sensicall piece of rayling 3. Iohn Gilpin himselfe â—â—ee the Lord hath delivered him in mercy out of the snares of Satan hath fully confest that it was the spirit of Satan and not the Lord Iesus that then acted him 4 And that all this grew â—ut of his casting off the Scriptures searching to a light within Take his owne words pag. 15. of a Booke called The Quakers shaken It was most just with God to give me over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes c. as for other provocations sâ— especially for rejecting the revealed will of God in his Word and heaâ—kning onely to a Voyce within me nay not onely to l sten to the Devils suggestions but to embrace his Voyce for the Voyce of Christ Thou seest now Reader what reason we had to say this rejecting the Scriptures from being the tryer of Doctrines doth open an unavoydable gap to Satans delusions 2. But what reason hath the man to say in this both Iohn Gilpin and we have consulted against Christ Nay have we not been pleading for Christ against Iudas the desperate betrayen of his truth and Gospel while we have been discovering â—he subtilties of Satan in those that are acted by him and pleading for the authority of Christ in his word against all the delusions of the Devill And as we can thankefully and comfortably looke upon it that God hath engaged us in so good a work so we can looke for our reward not what Nayler we beleeve could wish us but how can he defie when God hath not defied but what Christ hath promised to them that can
which we reply That this is no consequence at all and shall demonstrately prove it from these severall arguments 1. To set the minde and will of the spirit in opposition to the spirit it selfe can be no Gospel argument For the Scriptures are the infallible will of the spirit layd downe as the rule of Saints beleeving judging and walking What a reproach had it been when the spirit of God sent the Prophets to reveale his will or when Jesus Christ sent the Iewes to search the Scriptures what a reproach had it been to the living God for them to have answered We will not be judged not will we judge of spirits or doctrines by that Word or Scripture we will stand to the judgement of the spirit it selfe opposing the spirit it selfe to its owne will How wicked a thing had it been in them and how ridiculous an answer is this in Nayler 2. How is this to undervalue the wisedome of the holy Ghost himselfe Bereans commended for trying spirits by Scriptures Acts 17.11 who judgeth and pronounceth the Bereans more Noble then those of Thessaloniea in that they searched the Scriptures dayly whether those things that were spoken by Paul and Silas were so or no in that they searched the Scriptures the Spirit prizeth them for trying the Doctrines of Paul and Silas by the Scripâ—uâ—es the written Word And how wicked a thing is this in the Quakers to cry downe this trying of spirits and Doctrines of Scriptures which the spirit expressely ownes with such a signall testimony as speaking out in the soule such a spirituall noblenesse 3. It is confessed on all hands that the eternall Spirit is the originall of Scriptures and the tryer of Spirits who ever questioned that But our question is what the Saints are to try the spirits by not whether the spirit can try the Doctrines No. But we affirme that this eternall Spirit hath left the written Word as that which shall be the discovery touchstone and tryall of spirits and Doctrines by authority and divine warrant from himselfe See 2 Pet. 1.21 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 3 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God c. John 5.99 Search the Scriptures Isay 8.20 c. So that our asserting the Scriptuâ—es to be tryall of spirits is but setting up the spirit in his owne authority and throne over the spirits and consciences of men and pleading with men that the spirit may rule in his owne way and that they will try Doctrines by that Scripture which the holy Ghost commands them to try the Doctrines by And he that refuseth that touchstone which the spirit hath layd dâ—wne for tryall doth destroy the authority of the holy Ghos â—et hâ—m speake fantastically of trying by the spirit what he will But this reasoning of Naylers is as if when the Loâ—d Protector should declare what is treason by Law in publique Proclâ—mations a Justice of Peace should when a Person were proved before him guilty of treason according to that Law yet should say he is not to judge what is treason according to that Law but he would appeale from the Law to himselfe for what is treason though the Law had determined it before But in this case to exclude the Scriptures because the holy Ghost is the originall of them is to destroy that plaine truth Subordinate non pugnant things that act in a subordination though about the same thing doe not destroy one anothers usefulnesse or causality Nay the spirits being the Originall of all Scripture this being confessed doth necessarily confesse their divine authority for that trying of spirits for which they were given forth by the inspiration of God 2. As to that expression the spirituall man judgeth all things we have fully spoken before in pag. 79. We know there is a spirit of discerning which Beleevers have of Gospel mysteries but what absurdity is this to inferre therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures For that light which a spirituall man hath is a Scripture light 1 Cor. 5.4 opened 3. How ignorantly is that 1 Cor. 5.4 produced to prove this assertion when Paul sayes In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when you are gathered together and my spirit to deliver such an one to Sathan c. Paul is not trying of spirits or judging of Doctrines but exhorting the Church to excommunicate the incestuous Person and tells them That his Apostolicall power shall goe along with them in that sentence The verse going before tells you what is the meaning of his spirit where he sayes I as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed that is I in this Epistle doe send you my mind and my judgement what you ought to doe with this man that hath committed Incest as fully as if I were present with you and so you may goe on at your meeting to excommunicate him having for so doing not onely the authority of the Lord Jesus but also the conseâ—t and iudgement of me his Apostle This is that in those words In the name of the Lord Jesus and my Spirit How doth this man heape up quotations without any understanding of the minde of the spirit in them and with what exceeding ignorance doth he apply such Texts to his absurdities as neither prove them nor speake a tittle concerning them Excep 2 By this spirits were the spirits tryed before the letter was therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures Reply What a miserable non sequitur is here There was a time when the spirit had not given forth the Written Word therefore when the spirit doth give forth a written Word it is not to be regarded There was a time when the Law was not engraven in Tables of Stone therefore when it was engraven the Israelites must not looke upon it as a rule of life or judgement There was a time when the will of God was not written was not Scripture therefore when Christ bids you search the Scriptures you need not heed them at all But we leave the Reader to laugh at this absurd consequence The Bereans judged by another light then James Nayler doth who though they knew there was a time when Scripture was not written yet they tryed the spirits and doctrines of Paul and Salas by the Scriptures And the Spirit it selfe inspired and moved holy men of God to write the Scriptures to leave them as a tryall and touchstone of spirits though once there was a time when there was no written word But oh how doth God infatuate men when they will not submit to the authority of his Word Excep 3 He falls a rayling exceedingly and sayes We have no guide but the letter because we assert the authority of Scripture and addes how many minds how many formes how many gods doe ye worship and all pretend Scripture If it be possible to
denied truely he could not in so few words have spoken more untruely to prepossesse the Reader but we beg the Reader as to that to suspend his judgement till he have fully read the ensuing Discourse wherein whether any thing have been charged on them that is false and whether Nayler have done faithfully in owning what is truth will appeare at large In the Preface of James Nayler to his answer he tells you The Man of sin and his â—orkings in the last times Revealed That Christ now appearing in his Saints to discover the man of sinne with all his deceits and deceiveable workings now all the powers of darkenesse are gathered against him Gog and Magog As for those deceits and deceiveable workings truely these blasphemous Doctrines of these men with their Diabolicall delusions and quakings will make it appeare where the man of sin is now working To open this we shall stay the Reader a little Agreement betwixt Papists and Quakers 1. It is as claere as the noone day 2 Thes 2. chapter Rev. 12.3 Rev. 13. Rev. 17.4.5.9.10 that the Papall Apostacy and state is The Antichrist so often Prophesied of in Scripture Now it is as plainâ— that the very distinguishing Doctrines and practises of these men are such as are the maine principles of that man of sinne in opposition to Jesus Christ Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 7. 1. The Papists deny the imputed righteousnesse of Christ for justification and in scorne and derision call it A putative Righteousnesse Quak. These also from the same spirit deny the imputed Righteousnesse of Christ for justification And Nayler himselfe before the whole Court at Appleby discoursing with W. C. about justification by righteousnesse of Christ imputed not onely denyed it but in a sleighting way ended his discourse thereabout with this language That which is without is without So George Fox affirmed That he that is borne of God is justified by Christ alone without imputation Sauls Errand pag. 12. Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 3. 2. The Papists in their controversies with us doe positively affirme that justification is by inherent Righteousnesse Hence Bellermine Stapleton c. with the rest doe positively affirme that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is onely justum facere per inherentem justitiam that to justifie is onely to make righteous by inherent righteousnesse Quak. So these men doe as confidently affirme that they are onely justified by inherent righteousnesse or that righteousnesse within which Christ within them enableth them to performe See our proofe Perfect Pharisee pag. 10. Papist Bell. de juâ—tif l. 4. c. 11. 12. 13. 14 3. The Papists againe doe confidently conclude that a man may perfectly keep the whole Law Hence their neglect of the righteousnesse of Christ their workes of supererogation and the like Quak So the Quakers their great assertion as a challenge to all is that eâ—ery Saint is perfect that it is pâ—ssible to be perfectly holy and without sinne Perfect obedience to the Law of God is their great Principle which they confidently cry up more then any Papist Bell. l. 3. de verbo Dei c 4. 4. The Papists affirme that the Scriptures or the Written Word of God are not the supreame Iudge of sp rits Quak So these people that the spirits are not to be câ—yed by Scripture So A. P. in the Booke he but forth called Severall Papers p 19. The Woâ—lds touchstone is without them and they try the spirit by the letter c. but the Saints touchstone is within So that though they agree not what shall be yet both of them consent in denying the Scripture to be the judge of spirits Papist 5 The Papists call the Scripture aâ—â— ad letter a nose of wax a scâ—bbard without a sword Coâ—erus in Euchir pag. 44 Pighius lib. 1. cap. 4. So Melchior Canus sayes It is most certaine the Written Word is onely for Babes and is no way necessary for those that are growâ—e as is more fu l Melchior Canus defens each fid contra confess Worâ—berg cap. 36. Quak. So these men also not onely câ—y downe the necessity of the written word see the perfect Pharisee pag. 20. but also call it a dead letter a carnall letter that they are but a declaration of them that spake it So Melchior Canus againe saith the Gospel is not the Scripture as Farnworth in his Booke Discovery of Faith scoffes at our saying the foure Bookes of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospel pag. 1â— Papist 6. The great argument by which the Papists doe goe about to establish the truth of their way is Immediate revelations and pretended miracles the want of which they upbrayd the Protestant Ministers and charge us to be no Church Quak So the Quakers doe in their pretence to an immediate call and their supposed miracle of quaking So A. P. the Word of the Lord came to me saying So Audland the Word of the Lord came to me but of that more hereafter Papist 7. The Papists doe place much of their holinesse in their Eastings beggerly apparell and forsaking the World as they call it as their lâ—â—ing mewed up in convents and cloysters their wandring up and downe as Hermits and begging Fryers c. Quak. So these men is knowne to place abundance of their holinesse in Fasting beggarly apparell wandring up and downe the World c. we might adde much more but here you may see how the man of sinne in these men in their compliance with the principles and practises of the Romish way breaks out in his deceit and deceiveâ—ble workings 2. He is a stâ—anger in the Booke of God as to the discovery of Antichrist The spirit of errour the spirit of Anti-Christ who doth not observe the spirit of God mightily unvailing Antichrist by the revealing of the spirit of errour in him for 1 Iohn 2.18 there it plainly appeares that horrid errors are of that affinity with the Antichrist that when he would describe that man of sinne in the last time he calls the Heretiques by that very name Now are there many Antichrists whereby we know it is the last time c. Now besides those which we have named the Reader will easily observe such a masse and heape of Arminian Socinian Familisticall errors in their Doctrines layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee that he may câ—earely observe where the spirit of Antichrist works in all deceiveablenesse in this last time 3. Lastly It is the Saints bulwarke against the Papists while they call for our miracles that the spirit of God clearely holds forth that the comming of the man of sinne is after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders 2 Thes 2.9 So Rev. 16.13 the three uncleane spirits ver 14. are the spirits of Devils working miracles to gather together c. Now this further evidenceth the spirit of the man of sinne
which is the cause of such most wretched blasphemies 1 Cor 6.17 opened This next Scripture is 1 Cor 6.17 He that is joyned unto the Lord is one spirit The designe of the Apostle there being to dehort from Fornication upon the account of that union that is betwixt the Fornicator and the Harlot ver 16 they are one body for two saith he shall be one flesh doth adde a further reason to the Saints he that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit V. 15. Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them the members of an Harlot God forbid Now that this Text doth not hold forth a Beleevers equality with God will thus appeare For first The strength of the Apostles argument in this place is by the membership of a Beleever to Christ to prove the exceeding sinfulnesse of taking a member of Christ and making it a member of an Harlot all the union it holds forth betwixt us and Christ is onely as we are members of the Lord Jesus Now the membership of a Beleever with Christ is nothing to prove his equality with God For first The implantation of a Beleever into Christ being by Faith in his death and Faith it selfe being a finite grace can no way bring the soule into an infâ—nite equality 2. Besides Paul after membership by Faith in Christ yet complained of a body of sinne which utterly disclaimes all equality with God 2. The nature of this union speaks no physicall onenesse for as there is no physicall onenesse betwixt the Fornicator and the Harlot neither are they physically one body though so ca led out of a relative respect so neither is there any such physicall onenesse betwixt Beleevers and Christ And without the soules physicall onenessâ— with God there can be no equality betwixt it and God nay if Christ were not essentially one with the Father neither could he be equall with the Father Having thus seen the full meaning of these Scriptures we beleeve Readâ—râ— thou wilt wonder how the Justices could heare the Scriptures so blaâ—phemously abused and yet be satisfied as Nayler pretends they understanding his affirming his equality with God of the spirit of Christ in him For did they thinke that the spirit did essentially dwell in Fox how then came they to be satisfied when Fox attributes that to himselfe which is the spirits property or how comes he to be the same essentially with the spirit of God or did they conceive the spirit in Fox to be the graces or fruits of the spirit how then could they be satisfied it so in as much as those fruits of the spirit are in their best capacity but a new creature and so in no way equall with God But were they all satisfied How then was it that Mr. Sawry a Member of the late Parliament and as unprepossessed as any of the Justices then present was so fully satisfied that Fox was really and by confession guilty of those blasphemous words that he said he was equall with God that he openly declared against him in the presence of them all and urged the Iustices that Fox was clearely guilty of that blasphemy by his owne confession before them all Now for what he addes concerning Dr. Marshall his Oath That one of the Iustices who was present at Lancaster when Fox spoke these words did openly there witnesse against Marshals false Oath in the hearing of the open Court Let the Reader know W. C. 1. T is true that Iustice did so in the hearing of one of us but did it in such a way with his head hanging downe and a low voyce that spake clearely enough to observant hearers he had more will to accuse him then either confidence or reason 2. That Iustice was Coll. Benson t is true he was at Lancaster and t is as true he was a Quaker long since and before that time and had made it his worke to ride up and downe about that businesse to get Fox discharged from his blasphemy and what such a partiall evidence is to gaine-say the Doctors Oath let the Reader judge 3. Besides the Dr. swore it and so did Mr. Altham but Coll. Benson onely whispered it or said it at the utmost 4. It was fully evidenced after in Lancaster before the whole Country 5. But to discharge our selves and to cleare up the truth beyond all denyall we have here given you the testimony of the said Dr. Marshall and Mr. Altham sent to us and dated at Lancaster Ian. 19. 1653. George Fox said That he that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are one and they are equall George Fox being asked Whether he was equall with God answered thus I am equall with God The truth of these two Articles against George Fox we have already witnessed by deposing our Oaths before the Magistrate at severall times and still witnesse though now our testimony be not so necessary as formerly since the observant Reader may discerne what we witnesse more generally held out in their owne Books perticularly in the Booke entituled Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 8. line 8. See also their answers pag. 5. 6. and 10. Jan. 19. 1653. William Marshall Michaell Altham Excep 2 Thus we have you see fully cleared our first testimony And for the second That Nayler said He was as holy just and good as God against which Nayler thus excepts It is an untruth and was never spoken by me nâ—r ever did it enter into my thoughts but is a lye raysed up by the father of lyes the Devill and vented by his servants to make the truth odious and so goes on denying that ever Will. Baldwinson heard him say so c. We thus answer Reply 1 Surely this man thinkes by his rage to darken the truth of this testimony but that thou mayst againe acquit us and see that Iames Nayler makes no conscience of lyes as we have given thee the testimonies of Dr. Marshall and Mr. Altham for the former so we here give thee a large account of the proofe of this horrible blasphemy under the hand of Will. Baldwinson January 14. 1653. Sir YOu Writ to me to certifie you of some Words that I heard from Iames Nayler and Richard Farnsworth as they call themselves amongst us I my selfe went to George Bateman his house in Underbarrow called the Crag and there was a great deale of people come in to the house and Nayler and Farnsworth sitting beyond a Table upon a Bench and there Nayler speaking and teaching Perfection and to be attaind to in this life and to be without sin this teaching so did trouble me as being contrary to the Word of God that I stood up before the Table and spoke these words Friends doe you hold that a man may attaine to that height of perfection in this life to be as perfect as pure as holy and just as God himselfe And they joyntly replyed Yea and they were so And one in the house spake and said My question was not
he know them for they are discerned spiritually There the Apostle gives the reason why no light implanted in our natures in the creation can discerne the things of the spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned where he makes an opposition betwixt naturall and spirituall light and puts an impossibility upon discovering Christ by the light of Nature We may adde that ver 9.10 Eye hath not seene Eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of man to conceive c. but God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit 3. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted in the soule is not a knowledge of Christ as a Mediator will appeare by undenyable examples for there are multitudes of men and women without contradiction never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator though it must be confessed they had a rationall or naturall light Those thousands of Saints that went over into new England fully experienced it that there is not the least hint of a Christ implanted in those Indians one of us having often conversed amongst them can also fully witnesse it as is more fully also evident by the confessions of many of them in Print who have been converted by the Ministry of Mr. Eliot of which we spake in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 19. But may not these Scriptures fully confound these mens pervertings of that Scripture Reade Psal 143.19 He shewd his Word unto Iacob his statutes and judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any people and as for his judgements they have not knowne them Psal 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the Heathen that have not knowne thee Col. 1.26 the disponsation of God is given to fulfill the Word of God even that mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations But let Paul determine the contrary to whose judgement we shall desire to stand 2 Thes 3.2 All men have not Faith Light in all not sufficient to save 3. That this light which by Christ in creating of the world is implanted in man is not sufficient to bring to a Gospel salvation is also plaine from what we have convincingly proved that this naturall light may be in thousands that never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator and Iohn 17.3 this is life eternall to know thee the very God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent So that there is an utter insufficiency and incapacity in this light to bring to salvation So that though A. P. hath lately expressed his abhorring the distinction betwixt naturall and spirituall light yet our Lord Iesus and the Apostles are so full in it that they are of more authority with us then the novell opinion of A. P. Thus you see this Scripture fully vindicated from their wrestings for hence it is apparent that though Iesus Christ by whom the Father made the world Heb. 1.2 in his creation of man did enlighten and create a principle of light and naturall reason and understanding in the soule which we have proved is eminently there understood yet this proves nothing for the Quakers that either therefore every man that hath a reasonable soule Christ dwells in him or that he knowes Christ or that his naturall light can possibly suffice to bring to Gospel salvation Excep 4 Naylers next defence is this ridiculous argument If Christ be not in the most vile in the world c how shall he judge every one according to their thoughts as well as according to what they doe must he proceed as carnall Iudges doe by proofe or confession and no further Reply We need say no more to shew the simplicity of this argument then to aske them these questions Doth the Scripture say that Christ is in the Devills and yet he sees and knowes and judgeth them Or doth the Scripture say that the damned in Hell Christ is in them Nay but doth not Scripture speake in this language Christ in you the hope of glory Col 1 27. so that Scripture speaking of Christ in you speaks of him as being the hope of glory where he dwells And is Christ in Devils and damned soules the hope of glory For geâ—â—â—er the Quakers nor we are in this controversie at all disposinâ— concerning the abiquity of the Divine Nature by reason of which he is above all and through all and 〈◊〉 all But of Christ in us in that sense the Gospel useth the expression viz. as a saving light and principle the hope of glory 2. How ridiculous is it from Christs knowing all things to inferre that he dwells in all can he not know things unlesse he dwell in them Doth he not know the inward motions of Brutes Horses Fishes c. and is it Scripture Language from thence to inferre his dwelling in them Oh! the vainenesse and frothinesse of such a spirit and how are these men given up to blasphemy We shall conclude with that of David Psal 11.4 The Lord is in his holy temple the Lords throne is in Heaven his eyes behold his eye-lids try the children of men He hath another argument that Christ dwells in the Saints which we know in its Gospel sense but not in Naylers that Christ as man dwells in them but how absurdly and un-scripturally doth this conclusion follow therefore Christ doth dwell in all Thus you see our proofes fully confirmed his lyes confuted his perverted Scriptures cleared and answered and the folly of his arguments fully opened though he hath not answered one of our arguments and many Scriptures against that Doctrine Position 5. That Christ in the Flesh with all he did and suffered therein was but a Figure and nothing but an Example Excep 1 O deceitfull spirits c. are those words expressely found in Sauls Errand to Damascus as you say they are let that Booke be witnesse against you and your lying slanders to all that reade it Reply Surely this man pretends neither to conscience nor modesty that doth challenge us here for a lye for saying that Doctrine was expressely found in Sauls Errand He that shalâ— but looke upon that Booke pag. 2. pag 8. pag. 14. shall begin to know the impudence of Iames Nayler pag. 2. 9. line last in the schedule annaxed to the Lancashire Petition to the Councell of State you have this charge Richard Hubbethorn wrote that Christs comming in the Flesh was but a Figure Now are we lyars in affirming those words are expressely found there Nay further in pag. 8. where Hubbethorne answers to that charge we will give you his owne words Christ in his people is the substance of all figures types and shadowes fulfilling them in them but as he is held forth in the Scripture-letter without them and in the flesh without them he is their example or figure which is both one that the same things might be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Iesus Could a man have spoken more plainely to affirme what we asserted of him And doe we adde our
It soems there can be no greater offence to you then to cry downe sinne and to grow up to perfection c. you pleade for continuance in sinne and imperfection c. you pleade for the Devills Kingdome putting cleansing from sinne and perfection farre off till after death c. Reply Deniall of perfection in this life is no pleading for sin 1. Reader If thou hast read our Booke of the Perfect Pharisee thou wilt see we fore-saw this language from them where we told thee we expect from their former usage in this kinde they will charge us with pleading for sinne pag. 16.17 where we shewd that discovering the imperfections of the best Saints lest they should live upon their owne righteousnesse was no pleading for sin and this we proved from the practice of Christ discovering the imperfection of the Churches of the Spirâ—t rehearsing the faults of the Saints of Paul crying out of the body of his death So that to discover it is not to pleade for it unlesse you will blaspheme the holy One of Israel Had Nayler considered these Texts he might have spared the labour to repeate againe a cavill so fully answered but he answers nothing 2. But yet to make it more cleare that to say perfection in holinesse cannot be attain'd in this life is not to pleade for sinne and for the Devills Kingdome Consider first The Kingdome of the Devill is not pleaded for there where there is a pressing of a continuall wrastling and strugling in the power of Jesus Christ against it which pressing is our constant practice to our people For though it is plaine from Scripture that in the utmost attainements of the people of God still they see but in a glasse darkely 1 Cor. 13. and have not attain'd perfection Psal 3.12 yet it is their duty to struggle and wrastle against the body of their death and to presse towards the marke Phil. 3.14 Againe doth the Physitian meeting with a Patient in a consumption Telling a conceited perfectionist of sin is to deale faithfully vvith his soule who strongly conceives that he is in perâ—â—â— health though the Physitian demonstrate it that there 〈◊〉 such and such decayes in his vitall parts doth he by declaring this pleade for his sickenesse or rather by this means pleade for his use of effectuall means for his recovery For the whole noâ—â— not a Physitian but they that are sicke And Jesus Christ camâ— not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance Nay will not all say rather that the Physitian is more faithfull to the sickâ— man then he is to himselfe and more an enemy to and pleader against the sicknesse then the man is that conceits hâ— is sound and perfect This is the very case betwixt us and Nayler Nayler sayes he is perfect the Quakers say they are perfect and without sinne we pleade and say he is not perfect nay he cannot be perfect while there is such a body of deâ—â—â— in him and such a plague of sinne running in his heart we tell him that he that saith he hath no sinne is a lyâ—r deceivâ—â— himselfe and mâ—kes God a lyar and so doe pleade with him not as he malitiously would scandalize us to lye still in thâ— state content to have the body of his death worke his 〈◊〉 but to goe out to the blood of Jesus Christ for cure that 〈◊〉 quities may be pardoned to fetch strength from the 〈◊〉 of Christ not from his light within him against the bubâ—◠〈◊〉 up of corruptions in the heart and presse towards the 〈◊〉 Whether now pleade for sinne Nayler or we he that wiâ—◠〈◊〉 heare of the Saints being sicke or under any spirituall impâ—â—fection or we that demonstrate their sinne from Scripture that so they may seeke after the healings of the blood 〈◊〉 Jesus The spirit convincing of sin doth not pâ—â—â—â—e for sinne 3. What is the designe of the discovery and convictions 〈◊〉 the sinnes of men by the spirit of the living God Is it 〈◊〉 pleade for sinne that singular office of the spirit Iohn 16 â—â— he shall convince the world of sinne when God doth set oâ— secret sins the secret sinnes of Saints before their eyes is it 〈◊〉 set up the Kingdome of the Devill What blasphemy mâ—â—â— Nayler bring upon himself or is it not evidently to pull doâ—â— the throne of Satan and the power of sinne which never weakened in the soule till it be discovered and never â—â—â—gt more securely and effectually then in the heart of him that secure and confident he is compleat and perfect and sayes Rev. 3.17 I am rich and increased with goods and stand in need of nothing when he knowes not he is miserable poore blinde and naked Pleading for perfection here is a pleading for sin proved in seven particulars 4. We shall adde no more but this that pleading for this that any of the sons of men are perfectly holy and doe not sin which is the designe of Nayler is really to pleade for sinne and to set up and strengthen the barrs of the Kingdome of Satan 1. That soule will never struggle after a better state which lives in a conceit of his perfection here Rom. 8.24 hope that is seene is not hope for what a man seeth why doth he yet hope for how doth this strengthen the Kingdome of darkenesse contrary to Phil 3.12.13.14 Rom. 8 23. 2 Cor. 5.2.3 Phil. 1.21.22 2. This is to cast a needlesnesse upon the pretious blood of Iesus t is a trâ—mpling under foot the blood by which we are justified our propitia ion being through Faith in his blood Rom. 3.25 What needs this fountain for sinne and uncleannesse Zach. 13.1 where there is no sinne What nâ—ed of a Saviour where there is no sinne the whole need no Physi ian Mat. 9.12 and what a wickednesse is this to make the blood of Christ in vain and what is it but as Nayler saith â—o coâ—â—t the blood of the Lord Iesus as a common thing Gal. 3.22 3. Will such a soule ever goe out to pardoning promises and how doth Satan by such a Doctrine as this at once destroy the necessity of the blood and of the promises of Jesus Christ such as these Isay 1.18 though your sinnes be as Scarlet c. Isay 43.25 I am he that blotteth out transgressions Heb. 8.12 Your sinnes and iniquities I will remember no more Is not this evident from the practice of Quâ—kers both in their speaking and writing they never send these soules whom they call damned to the pardoning promises and blood of Christ but to their owne light to save them What need of the promises of pardon when I have no sinne and was it not the Pharisees sin Mat. 15.6 Marke 7.13 to make the command of God of none effect and is it not much more the Quakers sâ—n to make voyd the promises Rom. 3.3 Rom. 4.14 So Heb. â— 2.3 If the Word spoken by Angels â—as steadfast c. how
forsake their names and comforts c. for his testimony It is no small slandâ—â— to say we have consulted with John Gilpin whose face none of us ever saw to our knowledge till after the Printing of his confession but there is a day wherein God will call every idâ—e word to an account and then Naylers conceit of his perfection will not take off the guilt of such apparant lyes Position 15. That there ought to be no sense meaning or exposition given or studying of the Scriptures We had many proofes for this that it was a Position of thâ— Quakers which he denyes not we could adde more but ' tiâ— needlesse because Nayler in his answer goes about to justifie it 〈◊〉 the summe of which lyes in these two exceptions Excep 1 The Scriptures are either perfect or not perfect if perfect lâ—â— them alone and doe not darken them by your invented wisedome Reply 1 Though Scripture be perfect in it selfe yet needs expounding through the darknet of soules To which we answer The Scriptures were given out perfect by the Prophets and Apostles yet they gave them out iâ— some places more darkely and in some places more clearely as Peter plainely confesseth 2 Pet. 3.16 that some things iâ— Pauls Epistles were hard to be understood and layd downe 〈◊〉 darkly as that those that were unlearned that is not well aâ—quainted with the mind of the holy Ghost in them did wrâ— them to their owne destruction which shewes the necessity opening and expounding Scriptures unlesse we will suffer mâ— through their ignorance to runne upon their owne ruine 2. Were the Scriptures imperfect or did Ezra adde to them because he gave the sense and caused them to understand the Reading Neh. 3.8 3. Doth not Christ speake the necessity of expounding Scripture though it be perfect when he said to the Pharisees Goe learne what that meaneth I will have mercy and not sacrifice Mat. 9.13 Nay doth not Christ clearly assert the necessity of expounding when he saith Marke 12.24 Doe yee not therefore erre not knowing the Scriptures Ver. 26 Have ye not Read in the Booke of Moses how God spake unto him in the Bush saying I am the God of Abraham c. he is not the God of the dead but the God of the living where he opâ—n the Scripture and proves the Resurrection from thence wh ch lay but darkely hid in those words had not he that had the Key of David opened and expounded them 4. The necessiâ—y of expounding doth not arise from the imperfection of Scriptures but from that darkenesse that lyes upon the spirits of the saints For now we see through a glasse darkely 1 Cor. 13. so that though the Scriptures be perfect in them elves yet thou seest the necessity of the opening of them through the imperfectiâ—n that is in us This Christ and the Apostles knew when they made it a great part of their businesse in the teaching of soules to expound the Scriptures Excep 2 You that have not that infallible spirit that gave them forth what will you judge and open and expound them with c. Reply This is but an old straine of his railing but we can let prayses be to free grace say with the Apostle God hath revealed them unto us by the spirit by the light of which spirit we are taught to compare spirituall things with spirituall 1 Cor 2.13 and so to open the Scriptures for though we are the least of saints and Nayler thus revile us yet we can blesse God for the in dwellingâ— of the infallible spirit in us which communicates light to our soules in that measure that pleaseth him dividing to every man severally as he will The rest of that answer is a heape of bitter rayling which is no more to us then the chaffe before the wind or the Viper upâ—n Pauls hand which comes forth from the flaming of their contention James 3.6 and we can shake off as into the fire from whence it came Position 16. They cry downe Baptisme with Water and the Lords Supper as being but types and shadowes ceasing upon the appearance of Christ within them Excep 1 Though the generall charge lie and our many proofes which he doth not deny make it cleare that they cry downe all Baptisme with Water yet Nayler in his answer shuffles from that charge and falls to except against Infant Bapâ—isme Reply Reader we should willingly cleare up that Ordinance of Christ to thee but it hath bin so fully cleared in the learned writings of Mr. Marshall Mr. Baxter Mr. Blakâ— Mr. Siâ—enham c. 〈◊〉 are loath to fill up our Booke with the discussing and clearing 〈◊〉 that point it being already growne up to a bulke beyond 〈◊〉 thoughts and shall referre thee for satisfaction in thâ—se 〈◊〉 discourses But let the Reader observe that this is but a 〈◊〉 evasion of Nayler for our proofes doe evidently satisfie 〈◊〉 they cry downe all manner of Baptisme with Water no◠〈◊〉 the Baptizing of Infants but of all and its further appâ—â—â—â— by their practice Excep 2 But at last he speaks his mind and reasons against all â—â—â—tisme and quotes that of Paul 1 Cor. 4.14 Paul knew whaâ— he spake when he thanked God he had Baptized no more for Christ saith he sent me not to Baptize but to Preach Reply 1 1 Cor. 1 14 opened By these expressions Nayler seems to make Paul looke upon his Baptizing others as a sinne and so to thanke God that he Baptized no more How is this to heape sinne upon Peter and the rest of the Apostles who Baptized three thousand at one time Acts 2.41 Ierusalem and all Iudea went forth to John to be Baptized of him and yet Iesus himselfe made and Baptized more Disciples then Iohn See Iohn 4.1 though Iesus himselfe Baptized none but his Disciples what is this but to make â—â—ul condemne the practice of those saints and oppose the câ—â—mand of the Lord Iesus Goe and Baptize Mat. 28.19 2. But to give thee the full meaning of Pauls expression then shalt finde 1 Cor. 1.12 he is charging them for factions Ouâ— said I am of Paul another I am of Apollo c. and argues thus Were you Baptized in the name of Paul and thence takes occasion to blesse God for not having Baptized many lest any should from thence have growne into a Faction as himselfe gives the reason ver 15. lest any should say I have Baptized in my owne name and from thence have made a Faction so that he blesseth God that sith the Corinthians were growne of such Factions and dividing spirits that providence had so ordered it that they had by his Baptizing so few of them so little advantage to cry him or his name up in opposition to Apollos Christ or Cephâ—â— Yet by the history of the Acts of the Apostles thou mayst observe that when ever any were converted by Paul they were Baptized Acts 16.15 ver 33. Acts 18.8 many of the Corinthians
hearing beleeved and were Baptized Acts 22.16 c. But if Nayler from that expression Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach will argue against Baptisme he will fully make voyd the expresse commands of Christ for Baptizing and charge sinne upon the Apostles practice so that in stead of crying downe expounding Scriptures we leave him to study what that expression meaneth Excep For the outward signes of the Supper doe this in remembrance of me till I come but when he was come then the Bread which they did breake was the Body of Christ Reply 1 We cannot but be amazed at his grosse perverting Scripture but we have showne the false meaning of that expression till he come in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 29. The Lords Supper an Ordinance to the end of the vvorld That those Corinthians to whom Paul wrote and commands to use that Ordinance Doe this in remembrance of me till the comming of Christ c. were those in whom he was spiritually come before 1 Cor. 1.2 Yet notwithstanding that spirituall comming they were commanded to eate of the Bread and drinks of the Cup to shew forth the Lords death 1 Cor. 11.26 till he come that is not till his spirituall comming in the worke of grace that was past before but his comming in glory 2. The life of saints here is a life of Faith Heb. 10.38 the just shall live by his Faith Now for the nourishing and strengthning of Faith he hath left the Seales of Bread and Wine as the holders forth of his Body and Blood for Faith to act it selfe upon and therefore before Faith be swallowed up in vision these are appointed as standing Ordinances by the Lord Iesus for the establishing of it The rest of his answer is made up of such rayling in stead of reasoning and such inconsistent expressions that we shall onely leave him to the Lord to deale with his conscience for the guilt of them Position 17. That there is no mediate Call to the Ministry He denyes not our proofe and in stead of answering the many Scripture arguments we gave in our Perfect Pharisee pag. 32. for a mediate call to the Ministry he falls to a downe-right rayling though we have nothing we need to add to the arguments we there layd down against this Position meeting with no answer to what we have written yet we shall observe in the midst of his raylings these things Naylers contradictions 1. How flatly he contradicts himselfe when he tells the Reader pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles when they had gathered Churches out of the world they ordained them Elders of themselves yet after sayes l. 10. 11. these were ordained not by man and after l. 13. 14. this ordination was not by man nor by the Churches c. the Apostles ordained them Elders and yet those Elders were not ordained by man were not the Apostles men And was not this a mediate call wherein the Apostles ordained them Elders in every City Acts 14.23 2. Though he labâ—urs with abundance of bitternesse to cry downe any mediate call yet as he answers nothing to our Scriptures so we cannot but 〈◊〉 â—ve how he is forced in the midst of his rayling to confesse the truth saying pag. 19. l. 8. the Apostles ordained them Elders which is that mediate call we contended for Lastly The substance of his rayling is to tell us that we are invested in the Ministry by Magistrates Townes and Parishes when as we doe professe we doe not know a Minister in England that is ordained or professeth to receive his ordination from a Magistrate Towne or Parish 2. All that the Magistrate Towne or Parish doe is to provide maintenance for thâ—se that labour in the Gospel nay the late Commission which perhaps Nayler drives at never pretended to put any in the Office of a Minister but onely provided maintenance for him in the propogation of the Gospel so that notwithstanding what he hath said we are still fully convinced of the clearenesse of a mediate call to the worke of publique Ministry of the Word And thuâ— we have followed him in every materiall expression though â—e answers nothing to our Scriptures or Arguments And though his great cavill be at our testimonies and upon this cryes out 〈◊〉 we published filthy lyes yet the Reader will now clearely see that of 55. proofes we layd downe he onely denyes the truth of seven which are yet fully cleared and proved either by the testimony of these that were the witnesses under their Hands and Seales or by the demonstration out of their owne Books however Nayler labours to evade and shuffle them How unjustly we have been charged with lyes will now appeare and we must seriously professe that had it not been to cleare up those truths which he chargeth with falsehood and vindicating Scripture from his grosse perverting of them his Booke is so meerely composed of rayling and abusing us and so beyond expectation sottish and senselesse that we should not have thought it at all worth our answer or observation Were we not ready according to that rule 1 Pet. 3.15 to give a reason of the hope that is in us and that Tit. 1.9.10.11 to convince gainesayers whose mouthes must be stopped we should not have troubled thee or our selves with answering such triviall exceptions as doe hereafter follow against what we have proved so plainely from Scripture against the Principles of the Quakers But that we may not seem to leave any stone unturned that may cleare up the truth to the spirits of the people of God we shall proceed to the consideration of that which followes in Naylers answer Principle 1. Not to salute any REader though we have proved that this command Luke 10.4 of not saluting any by the way were but a particular case and not generally binding as we have made evident by many Scripture Arguments and the practises of the Saints and though we have fully proved the command of Christ imposeth generall salutation upon saints as a duty as thou mayst Reade Perfect Pharisee pag. 31. 42. yet thus he excepts Excep 1 The summe of his exception is against High-way salutes To which we answer Reply 1. High-way Salutes are the knowne practice of Quakers as when they meet any of their owne way in the streets or other-where their Phrase is How dost thou and their action to take them by the Hand And if that Text command against High-way salutes how contrary is their practice to it Salute no man by the way 2. However the Quakers doe contend against high-way salutes though by their owne practice Publican-like amongst one another they contradict this Principle yet high-way salutes were the practice of saints when holy Iacob met his Brother Esau by the high-way Gen. 33.3 He passed over before them and bowed himselfe before him seven times untill he came neere to his Brother c. Did nor gracious Abigail salute David by the high-way 1 Sam. 25 23. When David was
nothing a command till they judge it so How loose doe they hang in obedience to the Lord Jesus they will obey and not obey as they shall see cause Prayses be to our God that we have discovered them Now we understand the reason why Nayler answered none of our Scriptures we perceive he looked upon them as nothing to him and now we clearely see the meaning of their sâ—ufflingâ— about the Word of God and their scornefull expressions about the written Word c. So that we can boldly charge them from this place with this horrid blasphemy that the Quakers doe affirme ☜ That the Scriptures have no authority over their consciences at all nor any command in Scripture that was given to others that binds them save what command they have an impulse upon their owne spirits for This is the great strong hold of Satan and the snare with which he entraps them as he will From this Principle of theirs he goes about to prove the law fulnesse of people going naked and reviles us for speaking against it and sayes they doe it by particular command from God Reader thou mayst observe That Nayler denyes not what we wrote about their going naked in Perfect Pharisee pag. 48. the Wife of Edmund Adlington of Kendale going naked though the streets Nov. 21. 1653. We shall adde more because some that have lesse acquaintance with these people may seeme to make question of it On Munday October 28. 1653. there was one Thomas Holme of Kendale went as naked as he was borne through the Market place at Kirby Stephen on the market day at his turning he said Mark that It is not I but God that goeth naked c. and so after a time he went to his clothes which were kept in a Barne by foure men of his Sect. And to shew that this is a fact they justifie and pleade for in stead of mourning for the horrible sin of it Mr. Taylour a great ring-leader of that people came to that Towne the weeke after to seeke Mr. Higginson Minister of that place as he said having a Message to him from the Lord and being there in the Market place he very solemnely pronounced a woe against it for rejecting that Prophet of the Lord which he had sent to doe signes and wonders in it meaning as those that heard him did conceive that beast that went starke naked through the Towne a little before This we have from Mr. Higginson under his owne hand Thomas Castly January 10. 1653. went shamelessely naked as he was borne through the streets at Kendale Edmund Nubyes Wife went through Kendale naked except that she had a shift on and about the latter end of December last she came into the place of meeting of the Church at Kendale in the same posture Another of this Sect came in the same posture into Hutton Chappell at the time of exercise about the beginning of January Elizabeth Levens and Miles Newby went up the streets at Kendale in the same posture This we have attested from Mr. Walker a godly Minister at Kendale under his hand by Letters bearing date Ianuary 31. 1653. But were it needfull to prove it we could by sending into places where these converse fill thee with undeniable evidence hereof but its needlesse because Nayler denyeth it not but labours to justifie them in this sinfull practice As to the manifesting of the wickednesse hereof we shall give thee these considerations 1. No sooner had Adam and Eve fallen and were stripped of their Innocency but they saw themselves shamefully naked Gen 3.10 But God who knowes the working of corruption in the hearts of men after the fall he himselfe cloathed them lost their nakednesse should appeare ver 21. Vnto Adam also and to his Wife did the Lord God make Coats of Skins and cloathed them And doth not this manifest the will of God against going naked would he have cloathed them if he would have had them continue in that nakednesse 2 But that you may yet see further how odious being naked before others is in the sight of God the sad curse that Noah from the mouth of God layd upon Ham the Father of Canaan for not covering his Fathers nakednesse will appeare Gen. 9 22.23.24 c. Ham the Father of Canaan saw the Nakednesse of his Father and told his two Brethren without and Shem and Japhet tooke a garment and layd it upon both their shoulders and went backward and covered the nakednesse of their Fathers and their Faces were backeward and they saw not their Fathers nakednesse And Noah aweke from his Wine and knew what his younger Sonne had done to him and said Cursed be Canaan c. and he said Blessed be the God of Shem anh Canaan shall be his servant c. God shall enlarge Japheth and Canaan shall be his servant c. Where you see Ham is bitterly cursed and the curse entailed to all his Posteri y for that sinne of not covering his Fathers nakednesse And what then shall we thinke of such an expression as Mary Collison a Quaker in Kendale used to these that covered the nakednesse of the Wife of Edmund Adlington in the street at Kendale That they had hindered the worke of the Lord Oh! let them remember the curse of Ham and the blessing of Shem and Iapheth here expressed 3. The Apostle arguing to the care that one Saint ought to have over another doth it by a comparison of them with the body naturall and tells you 1 Cor. 12.23.24 those members of the body which we judge to be losse honourable upon these we bestow more abundant honour and our uncomely parts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Rom. 1.27 pudenda indecora membra instrumenta excretioni generationi destinata have more abundant comelinesse for our comely parts viz. Face Hands c. have no need marke that the uncomely parts needed yea they are such parts that as the Apostle phraseth it they lacked more abundant honour viz. lest their nakednesse and shame should appeare 4. In the 2. Sam. 10 4. When Hanâ—n the King of Amon had cut off the garments of Davids servants in the middle even to their buttockes c. and sent them away the men were greatly ashamed ver 5. and David in the sense of this Wicked act made warre against the men of Ammon and destroyed them so sensible was David of the wickednesse of this act of discovering the â—ckednesse of his servants 5. 1 Tim. 2.9 The Apostle wills that Women adorne themselves in modest Apparell with shamefastnesse and sobriety And we leave it to the Reader to consider whether either going naked or having nothing but their shift on be any wayes according to the modesty bashfulnesse and sobriety by the Apostle commanded in that place 6. To adde no more we shall conclude with laying before thee the wickednesse of this practice besides that impudence and immodesty even such as nature and ingenuity it selfe obhorres this
punish sin who shall make Laws who shall preserve the Peace shall Government when it is in no bodies hands But let him leave his wild notion and look upon 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selvâ—s to c. whether the King as Supreame or unto Governors as unto them that are sent by him And Rom. 13.4.6 he is the Minister of God to thee they are the Ministers of God attending on this very thing and there he will learn that him and them and he and they doe signifie not things but Persons in the power not Government but Governors so that we leave him amongst the rest of his fancies to study Sir Thomas Moores Eutopia or Platâ—es Common-wealth where probably he may find a Government without any Persons to Govern or be Governed Principle 3. That no man must have the title of Master All he replyes to this is that we bring the practice of men in the Old Testament to disanull the commands of Christ in the New We give the man leave to lye and rayle as having nothing else to say For if thou look into the Perfect Pharisee p. 34. 35. thou wilt see at least ten Scriptures out of the New Testament fully discovering the vanity of this Principle and the lawfulnesse of calling men Sir or Master besides the opening of what Christ meant in that prohibition Mat. 23.10 so that we need to add no more There are foure things that they charge against the Ministry to wit 1. That they love the high places in the Synagogues 2. That they weare long Robes 3. That they stand praying in the Synagogues 4. That they Preach for hire We dare without boasting say we have by evident demonstration from the Scripture shown at large that these were the proper guilt of the Pharisees and no way applicable to the godly Ministers of England See Pers Pharisee p. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. And we are saved the labour of further clearing those points for as much as Nayler returnes nothing of answer to what we there layd downe We onely beg the Reader in these points to compare our Book and his together and we leave it to thee to judge But as we have all along found nothing but rayling in stead of reason and the poyson of Aspes under his tongue in stead of the force of reason or Scripture so he doth here heap up such a masse of bitter revilings as thou hast not seen but we leave this evill spirit in him to the Lord to rebuke In pag. 40. of the Perf. Pharisee thou wilt find us repeating others of their cavills against the Ministry viz. Their having been at Vniversities 2. Making use of an houre-glasse 3. Preaching upon a text 4. Running to the powers of the World to protect us 5. Stealing from the Prophets 6. Not thoâ—ing Foure of these he answers nothing to for the fifth he repeats that Scripture that is against stealing the Word of the Lord from their neighbours as if to name the same charge again were enough to prove it though we have cleared it in the Perfect Pharisee That in quoting Scripture we doe but follow the example of Christ and the Apostles See Perf. Pharisee pag. 27. 28. and walke by Scripture rule And for the sixth viz. thouing we told him that the not thoâ—ing all doth no wayes entrench upon any Attribute oâ— command of God and being but an expression of a civill respect as Sir Master most noble most excellent which the Saints in the New Testament used we told him we saw no cause why the same freedome in our dialect might not be used Had he excepted any thing against these we should have answered him The Quakers make the pure language to vvhich the Saints are redeemed to be vvhen they begin to Thou all men And for that pure language which he sayes the Saints are redeemed unto we cannot but wonder at the lownesse of the mans conceptions in the things of God to think the pure language to which God restores them is to make them say thou and thee Oh! the blindnesse of these men in the things of Christ for that pure language Zeph. 3.9 imports the peoples deliverance from Idolatrous worship shall no more call upon their Idols nor call God by the name of their Idols Hos 2.16 nor lispe the language of Ashdod Neh. 13.24 but call upon the name of the Lord and serve him with one consent Having gone through these things in our Perfect Pharisee we proceeded pag. 41. to some considerations of their practises Practice 1. Quaking Excep 5 For trembling and quaking we owne it but for grovelling on the ground and foaming at the mouth are lyes and slanders of your owne inventing Reply Quakers grovelling upon the earth when in their fits of possession Are they lyes and slanders Was not Iohn Gilpin a Quaker and when a Quaker he tells you thus in the Book called Quakers Shaken p. 5. I could not stand upon my feet but was constrained to fall downe upon the bed where I howled and cryed as is usuall with them in a terrible and hiddeous manner to the great astonishment of my Family Pap 7. further In the time of Iohn Audlands speaking I was from the power within me drawne from the chaire upon which I sate and throwne upon the ground in the midst of the company where I lay all night all which time I was turned from my backe to my belly and so backe again c. Is not this grovelling upon the ground How dare this man say they are lyes Nay Atkinson who would seem to answer that Booke in his pittifull Pamphlet pag. 11. sayes he owned it to be of God So in Quakers Shaken pag. 10. he sayes I was cast upon the ground and lying upon my belly I was forced to licke the dust Atkinson denies it not but tells him this is his portion And how can Nayler say that these things are lyes and slanders We shall add but one more as to their foaming at mouth we shall give you this account under the hand of Mr. Moore Minister at Kellet in Lancashire OVt of the Quakers comming to disturbe our Congregation fell into a trance her belly puffed up her sides extended her back-bone thrust out her shoulders stretched up her whole body as a bladder when it is in blowing Whereupon I sent a mayd to George Fox to tell him he had indeed alleaged many Scriptures for quaking and trembling but withall to aske him what Scriptures he could shew one for swelling of the body or foaming at the mouth or where did he ever reade of any in those postures save onely such as were possessed with Devils He denyed that any of theirs swelled till she was pointed out and then he confessed it upon which she asked him whether lying was a sin because he had before denyed that he committed any sin Will. Moore Reade and judge what thou now thinkest of these mens actings and lyings As for our large discovery of
Bâ—oke be the persecution Pauls zeale against wicked principles and unlawfull practises may as well be called persecution as our pleading for the truth of Christ against opposers we being set for the confirmation and defence of the Gospel We now proceed to take notice of his answers to the Positions they have asserted the first is Position 1. Their Equality with God Excep 1 TO the first Proofe that George Fox affirmed He was equall with God Iames Nayler answers and sayes that it is false that George Fox did say that George Fox was equall with God Reply Let the Reader take notice that Nayler in his reply doth not deny our proofe at all when we say that George Fox said these words I am equall with God he doth not except against this at all 2. Naylers further reply plainely doth evidence it also where he confesseth that George Fox when he was asked Whether he was equall with God said I deny George Fox he is dust c. but I and my Father are one VVhere he clearely asserts his onenesse with God as to equality for that was the question the Justices put to him So that our proofe against him stands cleare by his owne confession Now the strength of Naylers answer lyes in this evasion which we doubt not but any that have their eyes open will discover to be the subtilty of the Serpent viz. he doth not deny that George Fox said He was equall with God but denyes that he said that George Fox was equall with God where Nayler makes Fox to distinguish ignorantly and make a difference betwixt George Fox and himselfe so that though George Fox is not equall with God yet he that is called George Fox is equall with God Now to this blasphemous evasion we thus answer 1. If George Fox for his blasphemy be turned into Hell what will become of him that is what will become of that person that is called by the name of George Fox 2. Is not the name alwayes given for the distinguishing of the person yea even when they are in a blessed state translated from corruption Mat. 17.3 there appeâ—red Moses and Elias talking with him they were Moses and Elias still though in a state of glory So that the person is understood and distinguished by the name and therefore by the name George Fox must be understood in our Booke the person distinguished by that name we were never so childish as to thinke that a bare name without its relation to the person distinguished by â—it any should cry up to an equality with God we speake of the person understood by George Fox Such cobweb answers and childish evasions may satisfie such deluded spirits as Nayler but we cannot but in the feare of the Lord cry out Oh! the plotted blasphemy of these men 3. Did ever any of the Saints of God in the old or new Testament distinguish in this way Did not Paul say Paul a servant of Iesus Christ not saying I deny Paul Paul is dust and must to dust but I am a servant of Jesus Christ what unscripturall and ridiculous language is this 4. Hence you may see it was not without reason that we were jealous of a mystery of iniquity lying under these distinctions betwixt George Fox and himselfe and in these words one whom the World calls James Nayler and in Francis Howgill his paper called A woe to Kendall one whom the World calls F. H. 5. The very evasion that Nayler useth is a very great demonstration to us that George Fox asserted he was equall with God For Nayler confesseth he was present when George Fox was asked whether he spoke this of George Fox as he was a creature Now here is a cleare confession that George Fox did say He was equall with God that 's confessed he spoke this onely the question was about the sence of these words and whether he spoke them of himselfe as a creature What ever the person were that asked Fox that question we would leave this upon his conscience what apprehensions he had of Fox For by the necessary and infallible rules of reason there is nothing that hath a being but either a creature or a Creator and if Fox have an other consideration as that question clearely implyes besides that as a creature it must necessarily be as a Creator and so his equality with God is asserted Well t is confessed he spoke these words 2. In this answer he denies George Fox as a creature the meaning therof as given in answer to that question must be this that George Fox as a creature denyes to be equall with God but that he as under some other consideration is equall with God he denyes not nay asserts it when he sayes I and my Father are one 6. We cannot but presse it upon the Reader that in theâ—e debates about equality with God it had been easie for Naylâ—r or Fox to have declared their totall inequality with God and not so to have deluded the people in such fond distinctions as I am equall with God and yet George Fox is not equall with God nay this debate certainly was an eminent call to thâ—m to disclaime it if this wretched principle had not filled their hearts yet in stead of our ingenious denying of this blasphemy their whole worke is falsely to assert it under the cloake of subtle and unscripturall nay blasphemous distinctions and evasions Iohn 10.13 opened Now for the Scriptures he so blasphemously abuseth they are these two First Iohn 10.30 I and my Father are one this Scripture that it is properly and incommunicably spoken of Christ God and Man and cannot be applyed to any meere creature we shall thus make evident The Person there spoken of is first in the 9. ver the Doore I am the Doore by me if any enter in he shall be saved Is George Fox the doore 2. That Person spoken of affirmes ver 18. that he hath power to lay downe his life of himselfe and power to take it up againe Hath George Fox that power 3. In ver 26. He saith to the Jewes Ye cannot beleeve because ye are not of my Sheep Dare George Fox say so The reason why men doe not beleeve is it because George Fox hath not elected them from Eternity 4. That Person there spoken of faith ver 27.28 My Sheep heare my voyce and I give unto them eternall life neither shall any man plucke them out of my hands Is it not blasphemy for Fox to assert these things of him else 5. He also saith My Father that gave them me is greater then all ver 29. Did the Father give the Elect to George Fox Now ver 30. this Person of whom these things are spoken it is who is one with the Father And you may as well ascribe the other five considerations to George Fox or any meere creature as this that he and the Father are one But oh the greatnesse of his ignorance of God of Christ of Scripture of himselfe