a part of the moral and eternal Law Nay does he not himself call those Sacrifices Types and Figures pag. 50. And are they not then ceremonial notwithstanding they were used before the Levitical Law was given But of this more anon Here he makes a Digression to fall upon some others who it seems have offended him in what they have written concerning the Nature and Power of the divine Will He names only Szydlovius the Dutch-man but hints at some others of our own Nation who he sayes by their Writings have not a little contributed to the Debauching of this present Age. Who these are he does not say but it is most probable they are some of those that for corrupt Interests have intrudâ—d themselves into the Priesthood But be they who they will seeing he acknowledges that this Discourse is beside our Subject I will at this time however step over it and meet him again at pag. 66. where resuming his former Argument he sayes thus That an Oath is not a part of the Ceremonial Law is clear from what hath been said concerning the Morality of it which proved it a part of Natural Religion and Iustice c. Answ. That which hath hitherto been said by him to prove the Morality of an Oath is no more then what he might have said to prove the Morality of Circumcision Sacrifices That was used by the Patriarchs before the Levitical Law was given so were these if then that is therefore moral because so us'd then are these also therefore moral because so used But if Circumcision and Sacrifices are not therefore moral although so used then neither is an Oath therefore moral although so used So that hitherto he hath done in effect nothing towards the proving an Oath a part of the moral and eternal Law which he must do before he can make it an Act of Natural Religion and Justice Besides he sayes here pag. 66. that the ceremonial Law is a System of Types and Shadows and in pag. 50. he calls the Sacrifices that were offered by the Patriarchs before the Leviticall Law was given Types and Figures by which he plainly alloweth them to be ceremonial notwithstanding they were used before the Levitical Law was given And yet he would have Oaths to be not Ceremonial but Moral for that very Reason beâ—auâ—e used before the Levitical Law was given So little is he consistent to himself But he adds Whatsoever was purely Ceremonial was purely Typical and if you cannot find in the Gospel an Antitype for an Oâ—t you may then be satisfied that the Command of Swearing was no part of the Ceremonial Law page 67. Answ. He is a great deal forwarder to affirm then to prove Where will he find particular Antitypes in the Gospel for all the Ceremonies in the Law Were not the Priests Garments Ceâ—emonial I would know of him then what Aaron's Breeches were a Tâ—pe of Let him find out an Antitype for them in the Gospel And we read Moses was commanded to kill a Ram and to take of his Blood and put it upon the Tâ—p of the right Ear of Aaron â—â—d upon the Tip of the right Ear of his Sons and uâ—on the Thumb of their right Hand and upâ—n the great Toâ— of their right Foot I demand of â—im what these Ceremonies were Types of if he can find Antitypes for â—hem in the Gospel he may do well to bring them forth and if he cannot yet I would not have him thence infer that the Command for these things was no Part of the Ceremonial Law but rather consider how over hasty he was in concluding the Command of swearing to be no Part of the Ceremonial Law unless an Antitype for an Oath can be found in the Gospel But saith he If you say an Oath was a Type of any thing pertaining to the times of the Gospel shew what was its Antitype or thing represented by it Answ. That I will do by and by after I have shewed the occasion and rise of Swearing which is the Type Man was created righteous holy pure innocent There was no Guile no Fraud no Deceit in him nothing but Sincerity Vprightness and Truth In this State there was no Vse nor Need of Oaths for while he abode in this his Word was Truth he spake a pure Language but man falling from this State set open a Door as it were to Fraud Treachery Perfidy Lying Falshood c. and thereby to Iealousies Suspicions Distrusts Incredulities c. These being entred wrought men by Degrees to that pass that not daring to relie upon one anothers Words and Promises they sought other Expedients to secure themselves by whereof Oaths was one so that Oaths entred through Transgression for want of Truth and Sincerity and the further men went from the Truth into Falshood the more frequent did the Use of Oaths grow This Bishop Gauden acknowledges out of Polybius In the better and simpler Ages of the World saith he Oaths were seldom used in Iudicatures but after that Perfidy and Lying encreased the Vse of Oaths encreased c. But this Perfidy and Lying as it had a time of Increase so it was to have a time of Decrease it was not to continue alwayes Men were not to be perfidious and false alwayes and consequently Oaths were not alwayes to last Now when the Gospel comes to be preached and received which is the Power of God to Salvation to all them that believe in it that purges out the old leaven of Hypocrisie Malice and Deceit that cleanseth the Heart from Guile Fraud Lying Falshood Perfidy and all Unrighteousness and renews man into the Image of God bringing him again into that Truth Sincerity and Uprightness which by Transgression he had lost And man thus redeemed speaks Truth again and bears true Witness without and Oath and is believed too without an Oath by all that are redeemed from Unbelief for in this Gospel-State the pure Language is again lâ—arnt and spoken which God by his Prophet promised to turn to the People And there is not a deceitful Tongue in the Mouth of those that are thus redeemed but having put away Lying they speak every man Truth with his Neighbour Now this Truth-speaking this True Witness-â—earing this Pure Language under the Gospel is the Antitype of an Oath the very thing that was represented by an Oath in the time of the Law and the Antitype the Truth being come which is more peculiar to the Gospel for the Law was given by Moses but the Grace and Truth came by Iesus Christ The Type which was the Oath is at an End Thus what the Prophet in the time of the Law delivered in the Type by the Word Swear That the Apostle in the time of the Gospel expresseth in the Antitype by the Word Confess plainly shewing that the Type was ended As therefore he argues that if his Parishioner cannot find an Antitype for an Oath in the Gospel he may then
Skill and Learning and not to the mighty Power of God Answ. The Reason holds good still Experience shews that these learned men that call themselves Ministers of the Gospel now do extol and cry up their humane learning beyond the Power of God for they make that Learning such an indespensible Qualification and of such absolute Necessity that though a man be indued with Power from on high though he hath received the Promise of the Father though he be full of the Holy Ghost and of Faith yet if he be not skâ—lled in humane Learning or at least supposed to be they say he is not fit to preach the Gospel But he saith That was a time extraordinary the Disciples being to plant the Gospel in all Nations and probably understanding no Language but the Syrian Christ therefore rains upon them cloven Tongues whereby they were capacitated to preach the Gospel to all People and Nations under Heaven page 100. Answ. If that was an extraordinary time and occasion in and upon which Tongues were given he is the more to blame for inferring from thence a Necessity of Humane Learning in ordinary times and upon ordinary occasions He should have remembred what himself saith page 128. That it is a most grand Fallacy to draw an universal Conclusion from particular Premises But a time he saith was coming when these Tongues should cease the main Work being done page 101. Answ. 'T is true Tongues being given but for a particular Service were to cease that Service being answered but the Teaching of the Spirit was not to cease it had no Dependency upon Tongues and therefore was not to cease with them it was before them and was to continue after them The Comforter the Spirit of Truth which Christ said he would pray the Father to send to his Disciples was to abide with them forever and he was to be their Teacher and to guide them into all Truth Besides the Apostle Paul writing to the Church at Ephesus amongst whom being of one Tongue there was no need of Tongues and by whom we read of no Miracles wrought tells them He ceaseth not to pray for them that God would give them the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation in the Knowledge of himself From whence it is evident First That divine Revelation had no Dependence upon Tongues or Miracles Secondly That although Tongues were for a particular Service and Season and therefore were to cease yet that the Ministration of the Spirit by divine Revelation was not to cease but to continue in the Church of Christ therefore also he exhorts the Thessalonians not to quench the Spirit 1 Thes. 5.19 But he saith It would be presumption in them who pretend to be the Apostles Successors to expect to receive all Gospel Knowledge in the same manner and in all those Wayes wherein it was communicated to the Apostles page 101. Answ. How far he will strain the Word all in the last Clause I know not but if by all those Ways he intends no more then an inward Manifestation and immediate Revelation of the mind and Will of God to them by the Spirit of Truth which dwells in them I will adventure to tell him it is no Presumption at all in those who are the Apostles Successors to expect to receive the Knowledge of the Gospel in the same manner for as our Saviour prayed not for them only but all such also as should believe on him through their Word So what he promised concerning sending the Comforter to be in them to teach them to take of his and shew it unto them to guide them into all Truth and to abide with them forever he did not promise with Restriction and Limitation to them only but with an extensive Relation to all that should believe on him This appears First from the Words of Christ He that believeth on me as the Scripture hath said out of his Belly shall flow Rivers of living Water But this spake he of the Spirit which they that believed on him should receive This is spoken indefinitely of all Believers without any Restraint to Persons time or place for the Invitation is general If any Man thirst let him come unto me and drink c. Secondly It does appear that this inward immediate and spiritual Teaching was known and received by the Saints of old in general of whom we read not that they spake with Tongues or wrought Miracles The very little Children Babes in Christ to whom Iohn writ had received the Anointing Ye have an Vnction from the holy One and ye know all things the Anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you and ye need not that any man teach you but as the same Anointing teacheth you of all things and iâ— Truth and no Lye and even as it hath taught you ye shall abide in him Hence it is manifest that in the Primitive Church the Saints in general had the Spirit poured on them had the Anointing in them that the End of it was to teach and guide them and that they were taught and guided by it Thirdly Besides this inward and immediate Teaching of the Spirit of God by which the Knowledge of the Gospel is communicated being the very End for which the Conforter was sent and as I may say the natural Effects of his coming implied in those Words of Christ He shall teach you all things he shall testifie of me he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you he shall guide you into all Truth c. it must either be granted that these Effects of his Coming are now received and known in the true Church or denied that the Comforter is now received and doth abide with Believers at all The Consequence whereof would be that Christ hath left his People Comfortless which he hath assured them he will not do but if the Comforter the Spirit of Truth be now to be expected he is faithful that promised if he is to be in the Saints and to abide with them forever if his Office be to testifie of Christ to receive of Christ's and shâ—w it unto them to teach them all things and to guide them into all Truth I hope Reader thou wilt not think it Presumption in them that are truly the Apostles Successors in Faith and Doctrine to expect to receive the Knowledge of the Gospel in the same manner as they received it Again he saith it is as ungodly and absurd to depend upon extraordinary Revelations and Miracles while we neglect the ordinary means under which we live as it is for an Husbandman to give over his Husbandry in expectation of being provided for by daily Miracles page 102. And a little lower he saith Though God's Hand be not shortned but that it is in his Power to give the Church now the same Gift of Tongues of Working Miracles and the rest as he was pleased to do in the Primitive Age of the Church c. Answ.
Text from the like Violence But to go on The Priest sayes Christ told them that in ordinary Communication those plain Assâ—verations of Yea and Nay are enough to give Credit to what we say if we would use our selves to speak Truth Answ. And if men would use themselves to speak Truth would not this be enough to give Credit to what they say in all Cases For if Truth be spoken what more can be desired in any Case He said himself but a little before speaking of the most solemn Use of Oaths If there were that Truth in men that their bare Testimony were of sufficient Credit then there were no need at all of an Oath pag. 61. And has he so soon forgot himself Nay he sayes now again pag. 83 While St. James saith Let your Yea be Yea and your Nay Nay his Meaning is Let your Promise be Performance and let your Word be the Truth to the end that among all with whom you converse you may be believed without an Oath If this be indeed the Apostle's Meaning as indeed I believe it is with what Face can any say he allowed Swearing in some Cases who renders it so utterly Nâ—â—dless in all For if their Promise was to be Performance that is the gâ—ing promised was to be as safe and sure as if it were already performed if their word was to be the truth then which there cannot be more in the most solemn Oath and if the End why it should be thus was this that among all with whom they conversed they might be believed WITHOVT an OATH what room I pray did the Apostle then leave for any Oath at all Will not such a Promise as is Performance such a Word as is the Truth reach all Cases serve all Occasions and answer all Ends in Humane Society Then farewel Swearing Thus have I cleared the words of our blessed Saviour and his Holy Apostle from the erroneous Glosses of the Pharisees of this Age who say that Christ and his Apostle did forbid no more but the erroneous Glosses of the Pharisees of that Age I shall now give the Reader a few Instances by which he may see what was the Judgment of the primitive Christians in this Case and so draw this Chapter to a Conclusion Pâ—lycarpus who lived in the time of the Apostles being requir'd by the Magistrate to Swear by the Fortune of Caesar refused giving this only Reason I am a Christian and was therefore Burned to Death Basilides a Roman-Soldier who led Pontamiena to Execution and by her constant Martyrdom was turned to Christ being required to swear refused it utterly plainly affirming that it was not at all lawful for him to swear because he was a Christian for which he lost his Head Orâ—gâ—n speaking of those Particulars which Christ forbad to swear by as Heaven the Earth the Altar c. sayes These things Christ speaks to the Iews forbidding them to give heed to the Traditions of the Pharisees otherwise sayes he before Christ manifestly forbad to SWEAR AT ALL Basil sirnamed the Great on Psal. 14. Lord who shall abid in thy Tabernacle He that Sweareth c. hath these words Here viz. in thâ— Law he seemeth to allow an Oath to a Perfect Man which in the Gospel is altogether forbidden But I say unto you Swear not at all In this place sayes he the Prophet is contented with an Oath if it be just and true but our Lord cuts off the very Occasion of Forswearing For even he that swears truly may peradventure be deceived some time or other but he that never swears at all is out of all Danger of Forswearing Gregory Nazianzen in his Dialogue against Swearing discourses thus B. What if I use an Oath unwillingly but to free me from Danger A. Let another allow thee that as much as to say Be the Danger what is will I cannot allow thee to Swear B. What if we be drawn by Necessity to give an Oath A. Why didst thou not rather dye for surely thou shouldst rather Dye then do it And that he speaketh here of ALL OATHS even the most solemn observe what he sayes a little before B. But what wilt thou say to me of the Old Covenant surely it doth not prohibit an Oath but requires a true one A No Wonder at that time only it was prescribed in the Law concerning Murder but now it is not lawful for any Cause so much as to smite or beat then the End of an Evil Deed only came into Judgment but now that also which moveth to the End This says he is my Judgment Observe his Way of Reasoning from the Instance of Murder to this of Swearing that as in the Case of Murder there 's more forbidden by Christ then was by Moses for Moses forbad the End only of Evil sayes he but Christ forbids that which moveth to that End so also in the Case of Swearing there is more forâ—idden by Christ then was by Moses which could not be unless all Swearing whatsoever were forbidden by Christ. Epiphanius sayes In the Law as well as the Gospel it is commanded not to use another Name in Swearing but in the Gospel he commanded not to Swear neither by Heaven nor Earth nor other Oath but let Yea be Yea Nay Nay for what is more then theâ—e is of Evil Therefore I suppose that the Lord ordained concerning this because of some men's Allegations that would swear by other Names and first That we must not Swear no not by the Lord himself nor by any other Oath for it is an Evil Thing to SWEAR AT ALL. Chrysostom says A Christian must avoid Oaths by all means hearing the Sentence of Christ which saith It was said to them of Old Thou shalt not Forswear but I say unto you Swear not at all Let none say therefore I Swear in a just Matter It is not lawful to swear neither in a JUST nor Unjust Thing Again says he If to swear TRULY be a Crime and a transgressing of the Commandment where shall we place Perjury Again speaking to them that tender Oaths to others But if thou fearest nothing else sayes he at least fear that Book which thou takest in thy Hand bidding another swear and when thou turnest it over and mark'st what Christ hath there commanded concerning Oaths Tremble and forbear Quest. What doth it then say of Oaths there Answ. But I say unto you Swear not at all Dost thou make that Law on Oath which forbids to swear Oh injurious Oh unjust thing This cannot be understood of vain Oaths for it is evident he speaks here of Iudicial Oaths taken upon the Bible Again What then if any require an Oath and impose a Necessity of Swearing Let the Fear of the Lord be more forcible to thee says he then all Necessity or Compulsion for if thou wilt alwayes object such like Occasions thou wilt keep none of those things which are commaded Again reproving the Clergy-men for tendring the
Truth Prevailing And Detecting ERROR OR An ANSWER to a Book mis-called A Friendly Conference between a Minister and a Parishioner of his inclining to Quakerism c. By Thomas Ellwood Isa 54.17 No Weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper and every Tonguè that shall rise against thee in Iudgment thou shalt condemn This is the Heritage of the Servants of the Lord and their Righteousness is of me saith the Lord. Printed in the Year 1676. THE PREFACE Reader THere came lately to my Hand a little Book bearing the Title of A Friendly Conference c. which having turned over I found the Drift and Design of it was to infame the People called Quakers by representing their Principles absurd and heterodox mis-stating some and with sophistical Arguments perverting and opposing others This when I had observed I held my self concerned to vindicate those Truths which we believe and make Profession of from the Absurdities and Errors which the Author of that Book partly through Ignorance but principally through Envy hath endeavoured to fasten on them This is the Occasion and Subject of the following Discourse which I recommend to thy serious and impartial Perusal Who the Author of the Conference was I did not know when I wrâ—â— the Answer to it he not having so much Ingenuity 〈◊〉 to say 〈…〉 as to 〈◊〉 his Name to his Book But after the Answer had a good part passed the Press I received Information concerning the concealed Author both Who and What he is his Name Place c. which I forbear at preâ—ent to publish in Expectation that he himself should do it in his next If he persist a lurking Adversary let him nâ—t think much if after so fair a Warning I give the World his Name with such an 〈◊〉 as his unmanly Dealing with us deserves He writes himself A Lover of the Truth But seeing Truth seeks no Corners what should induce him to conceal his Name If he indeed believed that to be Truth which he undertook to maintain he needed not to have been either afraid or ashamed to have openly avouched it Although I do not think men strictly tyed in all Cases to affix their Names to whatsoever they write yet in Matters of Controversie especially wherein one man shall accuse or charge another Man or People I conceive the Opponent in point of Honesty obliged to give hâ—â— Name as a Caution or Security for making good hâ—â— Charge or giving Satisfaction to the Party injured in case he fail in his Proof Certainly this way of striking in the dark thâ—s skulking way of writing Controversâ—es is very disingenuoâ—â— unfair and unmanly fitter for Fâ—ux with hâ—s Dark-Lanthorn then for one that pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel But leaving the Author for this time to hug himself in the dark and delight in his own Obscurity I shall offer two or three short hints relating to the Book it self 1. Some of the more minute and less material Passages in the Conference I have purposely omitted that I might have more scope without swelling this Book into too great a Bulk more largely to insist on and freely handle those things which are indeed of greater Weight and Moment 2. In those Cases wherein I have had occasion to use the Testimonies of Ancient Authors I have been necessitated for want of some of the Books themselves which in the Country I knew not how to procure to take some few Quotations upon trust from others yet not without great Caution in the Choice of those Quotations for I assure thee Reader I would rather choose to lay them all wholely aside then knowingly to obtrude one wrong one upon thee 3. The first Chapter may peradventure seem not so much defensive as offensive relating more particularly to that Ministry whereof my Opponent professes himself a Member But let it be considered that the Suâ—ject wâ—s not of my choosing but his proposing whose Method and Matter I am in some sort obliged as a Respondent to observe THE CONTENTS Chap. I. OF the present Ministry The Cause of the Peoples not profiting inquired Some Reasons of it given page 1. Chap. II. Of using the Word Thou to a Single Person p. 27. Chap. III. Of Titles and Civil Respects as they are called p. 31. Chap. IV. Of Confession p. 50. Chap. V. Of Perfection p. 54. Chap. VI. Of Swearing p. 100. Chap. VII Of Taking Texts Studying Sermons and Selling them to the People p. 196. Chap. VIII Of Humane Learning Divine Inspiration and Revelation p. 205. Chap. IX Of Tythes p. 277. ERRATA THe Reader is desired before he reads the Book to correct with his Pen the following Mistakes of the Press Others of less moment as Mis-pointings Mis-placing of Letters and the like a friendly Eye it is hoped will overlook or excuse Page 20. line 16. for ever read even p. 24 l. 7. f. more r. move p. 28 l. 3. f spoken to r. spoke unto lin 12. f. answered r. as we read p. 33 l. 24. f mistake r. mis-state p 40. l. 10 f. same now r. same Now. p. 65. l. 3. f that e did r. that he did p 72 l. 20 f. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 77. l. 1. afteâ— this add sense p. 86 l. 13. f wo r. who p. 111. l. 2 f. that r shot p. 114. l. 25 f to r. so p 115. l 25. f Ambassadour r. Ambassadours p. 116. l. 22. f. I for cannot r. for I cannot p. 130. l. 8. f. lib. 72 r lib 7. l. 13. f. takest r. takes it p. 131. l. 4. f. degenerate r derogate p. 132. l. 26. after saith r. my p. â—37 l 5. f. commanded r commended pag. 149. l. 26 f. Quakeos r. Quakers p. 154. l. 25. f margent r. margin p 158. l. 21. f. against r. upon p 164 l. 29. f aid r. said p. 179. l. 23. r. prohibition pag 202 l. 7. deâ—e and. p. 205. l. 2. r. inspiration p. 209. l. 7. f. pricipal r principal p. 218 l. 11. f. we are far r we are so far pag 237. l 3. f. discover r. discovered p. 240. l. 14 f. concerned r. concerning pag. 257. l. 10 f having r. have lin 21. f. for r from p. 259. l. 26. dele his p. 260. l. 8 9. f. ye speak r. yet spake CHAPTER I. Of the present Ministry The Cause of the Peoples not profiting inquired Some Reasons of it given THE Nameless Author of the ill-named Friendly Conference to lay a Foundation for his Discourse causes his Parishioner to report that At a Quakers Meeting a notable Speaker propounded this to the Consciences of the Heaâ—ers Whether any among them could affirm that he had received any Spiritual Advantage by his long frequenting of the Steeple-houses Whether this Question was ever really thus proposed in any of the Quakers Meetings is not my present Business to inquire But seeing it is now propounded after such a manner and that by one who terms himself a Minister I cannot but desire
is and thereupon he confidently inferâ— Then the Quakers are 〈◊〉 and highly to be blamed Why what are the Quakers concerned in the Parishioner What 's he to them or they to him Oh sayes the Priest He is inclinâ—ning to Quakerâ—â—m and more than than He approves of some Quakers p. 19. What then is that sufficient to intitle the Quakers to whatsoever 〈…〉 Priest has a mind to cast upon them Observe Reader the Injustice of this man who from a bare Supposition of his own suggesting to a Parishioner of his own making adventures to charge a Fault and Blame upon all the Quakers in general What Man or People after this way of writing might he not Abuse and Traduce But as he hath dealt dishonestly with us so has he also befool'd himself for he makes the Parishioner for nine or ten pages together contend with him against Respecting Persons forgetting that at their very first congress he brought in the very same Parishioner speaking to him thus Take it not for Flattery if I tell you that the Respects which I bear to your Person are most sincere and cordial What thinkest thou Reader Did the Priest remember his Decorum here Was this a fit Person to represent the whole Body of the Quakers and dispute against Respecting Persons Nay does it not look like a Design laid to mistake our Principles and misrepresent us to the World But our Confidence is in the Lord our God whose Truth we are engaged to defend Let us therefore go on and see what Strength our Adversary hath brought forth The Parishioner after his solemn Respect to the Priest's Person urges against Respect of Persons those words of the Apostle Iames My Brethren have not the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ the Lord of Glory with Respect of Persons c. This sayes the Priest is not meant of Civil Respect but such sort of Respect only as did violate Iustice in their publick Consistories when the gaity and outward splendor of the Rich tempted them to partiality and to give such a Sentence as agreed not with the Merit of the Cause p. 21. Answ. That this was not the Apostle's Drift let it be considered to whom he writ namely to the Twelve Tribes that were â—â—attered abroad which cannot reasonably be supposed to be the whole People or Political Body of the Iews but such of them as had received the Christian Faith as theâ— Text in Controversie plainly shews My Brethren have not the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ with Respect of Persons This also Bâ—za well observes in his Marginal Notes upon the place Fidelibus omnibus Iudaeis sayes he cujuscunque Tribus sint per terrarum Orbem dispersis i. e. To all the Faithful Iews of what Tribe soever they are dispersed throughout the World Which dispersion may not improbably relate to that great Persecution which upon Stephen's Death was raised against the Church at Ierusalem by means of which the Believers there were all scattered abroad through the Regions of Judea and Samaria Now this being premised consider Reader what Consistories or Courts of Judicature these poor scattered Believers could then have who being exiled as it were from their own travailed through other Countries to preach the Word But he sayes This Supposition for he maketh no more of it namely that by Assemblies the Apostle here means Places of Iudgment will appear to be well grounded when we consider that the Jews had a Law whereby it was provided that when a Rich Man and a Poor had a Suit together in their Courts of Iudicature either both must Sit or both stand in the same rank to avoid all Marks of Partiality To the Terms of which Law the Apostle here has reference p. 22. Answ. He had done but his part to have quoted his Authority for this Law If such a Law the Iews had whence had they it If it had been given them of God doubts less we should â—ave found it amongst those Laws which they received from him If it was not from God but an Invention and Tradition of their own it is altogether improâ—able that the Apostle of Jesus Christ would have any reference thereunto especially writing to those who were then coming off not only from the Traditions of the Iewish Elders but even from the whole Iewish Polity Besides If this Law was but a Sanction of their own which for ought I yet see it mâ—st be or be nothing The Iews were so superstitiously Zealous for the Traditions of their Fore Fathers that it is no way likely they would so positively violate a Law of their making He sayes The Law was that the Parties to the Cause must either both Sit or both Stand in the samâ— rank whereas here the one is said to sit and the other to stand and so not both sit or the one to sit in a good Place and the other under the Footstool and so not both in the same rank This had been directly to thwart their own Tradition if this Law he speaks of was a Tradition of theirs a thing they were seldom guilty of for they too often preferred their own Traditions even to the Law of God But sayes he The Apostle could not mean by Assemblies Civil Meetings because he then had contradicted what his Lord had plainly allowed Luke 14.8 9 10. When thou art bidden of any man to a Wedding sit not down in the highest Room lest a more honourable man then thou be bidden c. Where he sayes Difference and Degrees of Honour and Place are evidently allowed by our Saviour c. Answ. For the right Understanding of this Scripture it must be considered in what time and to whom these words were spoken For the time it was under the Law before the One Offering was actually offered up That was an Outward State the People of God was then an Outward National People their Religion and Worship was much outward and shadowy their Wars were outward their Ornaments were outward their Honours and Respects to one another were outward And in this State many things were indulged to the Iews many things permitted and connived at partly because of the Hardness of their Hearts and partly by reason of their Weakness But this State was to last but â—ill the Time of Reformation and when the Time of Reformation was fully come these things grew out of Use. Old things were done away all things became new That People were put away from being the People of God upon those former Considerations and He is the True Jew now which is one inwardly whose Praise is not of Men he regards not the Honour and Respect which men give but of God That Outward Worship is laid aside and now the true Worship is neither in the Mountain nor yet at Ierusalem but in Spirit and in Truth The outward Wars were ended as to Christians the Swords were beaten into Plow-shares and Spears into Pruning-hooks as
Perfection but sheweth that however it was with him or how high soever his Attainments were he would not take upon him to contend with his Maker or justifie himself against the Almighty but submit himself unto him and therefore he saith in the 15 th verse Whom though I were Righteous which all I suppose will grant he was yet would I not answer but I would make supplication to my Iudge yet to shew that he did not this from any Guilt of sin that lay upon him he appeals to God himself Thou knowest saith he that I am not Wicked yet for all that there is none can deliver me out of thy Hand but though he thus expresseth himself in Submission to the Hand and good Pleasure of the Lord whose Power and Soveraignity he acknowledgeth yet against the false Suggestions of his seeming Friends who like this Priest would fain have fastned some Iniquity upon him he vindicates his Innocency plainly and smartly Till I dye saith he I will not remove my Integrity from me my Righteousness I hold fast and will not let it go my Heart shall not reproach me so long as I live And it is observable that those three men who like this Priest had charged Sin upon Iob were fain to offer Sacrifice and intreat Job 's Prayers on their behalf to appease the Wrath of the Lord which they had kindled against themselves chap 42.7 8 9. He urges also Gal. 3.22 But that being the same with Rom. 3.23 is explained before Another that he brings is Iames 3.2 In many things we offend all Answ. This does not prove that the Apostle himself was an Offender any more then that other saying of his concerning the Tongue vers 9. Therewith Bless we God and therewith Curse we Men can prove that the Apostle himself was a Curser which I do not helieve this Priest as forward as he is to sully the Saints will dare to affirm of the Apostle Iames. These are the Scriptures he hath quoted to prove that St Iohn in those words Whosoever is born of God sinneth not did not intend that any in this Life hath gotten an absolute Conquest over all Sin But in the respective Answer thereunto I have shewed that the Apostle may very well be understood in this without the least Contradiction to any of these Scriptures none of which plead for a Continuation of Sin or deny a Possibility of being perfectly freed from Sin His 2d Reason why those words of Iohn cannot be interpreted to signifie that any in this Life hath gotten an absolute Conquest over all Sin is because he would then contradict himself also having plainly said 1 John 1.8 If we say we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the Truth is not in us pag. 39. Answ. From the last Instance in the words of Iames it is evident that the Apostles in Condescension to those to whom they writ did many times include themselves as in the Condition of others that so they to whom they writ might receive Exhortation the better And thus did Iohn in this place He as well as Paul writ of the several States and Conditions Growths and Degrees in the Church of God in which no doubt there were some who could not at that time truly say they had no sin To these he condescends with these he includes himself And as Paul in one place said I speak after the manner of men because of the Infirmity of your Flesh Rom. 6.19 And in another place To the Weak became I as weak that I might gain the Weak 1 Cor. 9.22 the same may be said in this place of John who for their sakes including himself with them did in his own Person joyntly with theirs speak of that State which some of them were then in and which himself also had once been in as well as they But from this Condescension of his to infer that he himself was at that time really and actually in that State is neither fair nor true for though some among them might not have attained so far yet he himself had doubtless felt the Blood of Jesus Christ cleansing him from all sin else could he not experimentally have said If we confess our Sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our Sins and to cleanse us from all Vnrighteousness But if he did really and truly know that the Blood of Jesus Christ had cleansed him from all Sin from all Vnrighteousness Surely then he might at that time without deceiving himself have said he had no sin He writes to Little Children to Young Men to Fathers He tells the little Children their Sins were forgiven yea and that they knew the Truth which our Saviour told the Iews should make them free But he tells the Young Men they are strong and the Word of God abideth in them and they have overcome the Wicked one Is not that a Conquest over Sin He exhorts the Little Children to abide in Christ for whosoever abideth in him sinneth not and we are in him saith the Apostle himself and he that abideth in him ought also to walk even as he walked Doth he tell them they ought to do that which is impossible or had not Christ an absolute Conquest over all Sin We know saith the Apostle that whosoever is born of God sinneth not but he that is begotten of God keeps himself that the Wicked One toucheth him not If he be so kept that the Wicked One which is the Devil touches him not how can he sin Doth any sin but whom the Devil touches So long as any are kept out of the Devil's Reach so long I hope he 'l grant they may be without Sin These Young Men then who had so overcome the Wicked One the Devil that he could not touch them had not these gotten an absolute Conquest over all sin Now if such was the state of the Young Men what had the Fathers and Elders arrived to These things sayes John I write unto you my Little Children not to countenance your continuance in sin not to beget a Belief in you that it is impossible for you to live without Sin To what End then that ye sin not And if any man sin we have an Advocate c. If any man sin why is it come to that might such a man as this have then objected Dost thou make an if of that which is so certain so unquestionable so unavoidable If any man sin as if it were possible for any man to live and not sin Yes yes saith this holy Apostle if he abide in Christ for he that abideth in Christ sinneth not And in this he is not contradictory to himself for indeed the whole stream of his Epistle runs in this Channel But it seems strange to the Priest that our Lord should teach his Disciples to pray as often for the Forgiveness of their sins as for their daily Bread whilst we must suppose says
he that when they so prayed they had no Trespasses to forgive pag. 39. Answ. This will not seem so strange if it be considered that when our Lord taught his Diâ—ciples thus to pray they were but young and weak their Faith which should have given them Victory over Sin was weak and sometimes almost ready to wavâ—r and therefore in the very same Chapter he blames the Littleness of their Faith and frequently after in the same Book of Matthew calls them O ye of Little Faith They had not yet experienced the Work of Faith with Power in that Degree which afterwards they did for the Holy Ghost was not yet poured forth because that Iesus was not yet glorified Now this Form of Prayer was suited to their present Condition but it doth not appear that it was intended to be a standing Rule for them to pray by as long as they lived but as a Supplement to their Weakness until the Comforter the Spirit of Truth was come unto them which Christ promised to send them immediately after his Departure and as it were in his room But when the Comforter was come when they had received the Spirit of Truth in that more eminent Degree He was then to lead them into all Truth He was to teach them what they should pray for and that after an higher manner then hitherto they had prayed as our Saviour's words imply Iohn 16.2 and he did so as the Apostle witnessâ—th Likewise the Spirit helpeth our Iâ—firmities for we know not what we should ask for as we ought mark that for all their former Teaching but the Spirit it self maketh â—ntercâ—ssion for us with Groans which cannot be uttered From Scripture-Arguments he comes to Reason Who sayes he can be so confident to say He is free from all the Infiâ—mities of his Nature Answ. Every Infirmity of Nature is not Sin A man therefore may be free from Sin though not from all the Infirmities of his Nature Again He that saith he cannot fall by Error is already fallen by Pride Answ. This relates not to a Possibility of not sinninâ— but to an Impossibility of sâ—â—ning which is not the Subject of the present Controversie He goes on to shew That it is not they that give Incouragement to sin by denying a Possibility of being freed from it but we who believe such a Possibility Pray says he who is your Friend he that saith you have no Enemy or he that informs you where he lurks pag. 41. Answ. He all along mistates the Case either through Ignorance or Design yet I would not think the worst of him By Perfection by a State of Freedom from Sin we do not mean a State free from being tempted to sin Our blessed Saviour in whom was no sin in that sense was not free he was tempted by the Devil But to be tempted is no sin So that we do not tell People they have no Enemy but we tell them they have an Enemy we tell them where this Enemy lurks and how he works We tell them this Enemy may be overcome and also how Now then turn the Question the right Way and let me ask Who is thy Friend O Man He that tells thee Thou canst never overcome thy Enemy will be too hard for thee 't is in vain to expect a Compleat Victory or He that incourages thee to fight the good Fight of Faith and tells thee that Satan if thou resist him will flee before thee and not only â—o but that the God of Peace will â—râ—ad Satan under thy Feet and that shortly too Again He says It is one Step to Conversion to see our selves unconverted and one Step more to Happiness to percerve our selves Miserable Sinners Answ I grant indeed it is so But mâ—st we alwayes stand upon this one Step Must we never take another Step Never step forward He moves very slow indeed that takes but one step all his Life If we see our elves misererable sinners at the first step must we see our selves miserable sinners at the last step too which they do from the first step to the last confess themselves such or else they sin in so confessing this is miserable indeed miserable Comforters are all they who tell men they must be miserable Sinners as long as they live Let such take heed that they run not in vain Again He saith I need not guard my House when I am sure that no Thieves can enter Answ. This is also quite besides the business The Question is not whether no Thieves can enter although I do not guard my house but whether it is possible for me to keep the Theives from entring if I do guard my house That this is possible our Saviour expresly tells us If saith he the good man of the House had known at what Hour the Thief would come he would have watcht and not have suffered his House to be broken through So that the good man had Power and was able to have kept out the Thief if he had stood upon his Guard and the intent of this Parable was to excite the Disciples to Watchfulness which our Saviour did frequent lyinculcate to them What I say unto you I say unto all watch And again Watch and pray that ye enter not unto Temptation for there 's the Sin It is not a Sin to be tempted but it is a Sin to enter into the Temptation Now tâ—en if the Disciple watches and prayes it is possible for him to be kept from entring into Temptation and consequently possible for him to be kept from sinning which is directly to the Case Again he saith it is in vain to offer him Physick wo concludes himself well Answ. If any man that is not well concludes htmself well he is to blame but that is nothing to our purpoâ—e The Questionis Whether he that doth really receive the Physiâ—k and doth carefully observe the prescriptions of the Physician can be perfectly cured or no The Disease is Sin can man be perfectly cured of this Disease If he grants he may he yeilds the Cause if he denyes it her stâ—cts upon the Abilâ—ty of he Physician The poor Woman with the bloody issue had suffered much from many Physicians and spent all she had upon them but was never a whit the better Miserable Sinners at the first and miserale Sinners to the last her bloody Issue ran twelve Years together but when once she came to Christ he made her whole He works perfect Cures Will the Priest say that man may and shall be cured of his Disease of sinning but not in this Life not till he dies this is not Gospel surely for that is Glad-tidings but this is Sad-tidings to the poor patient that he must carry his Disease with him to his Grave and yet alwayes be taking costly Physick this if he believe it were enough one would think to send him forth with thither If such a cure could have
sense he will own himself to be a Lyar. David indeed in his great Affiction let such an Expression drop bâ—t he quickly re-called himâ—elf and confest it was spoken in his Haste This man has been over hasty too and has catcht up the word at a venture let us see whether he who is so much for confession will as fairly confess his Error Again he sayes Mankind is so generally leavened with Hypocrisie and Fear or Favour Malice or Interest swayes with the far grea or part of men and therefore it becomes highly needful that their Evidence be demanded and given in such Forms as are most binding to thâ— Conscience which an Oath by all the World is ackâ—owledged to be pag. 61 62. Answ. Here observe that from the Hypocrisiâ— and Wickedness of men he infers a needfulness of their Evidence being demanded and given by an Oath Their Evidence Whoâ—e Evidence Their Evidence who are leavened with Hypocrisie and swayed by 〈◊〉 Interest c. What is this to good men to 〈◊〉 to the Disciples of Christ If 〈◊〉 cannot be hold without Fetters must True men therefore wear Shackles Or will he reckon all men Felloâ—s as even now he called all men Lyaâ—s But if it were true that the generaâ—â—y of men were so leaâ—ened with Hypocrisiâ— and swayed with Malice Interest c. as he sayes they are and that therefore they could not believe one another's Evidence without Swearing would it be an Act of necessary Iustice and Charity to good men out of whom the old Leaven of Hypocrisie is purgâ—d and who keep the Feast of a Good Conscience not with that old Leaven neither with the Leaven of Malice and Wickedness but with tâ—e Vnleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth to demand their Evidence also by an Oath or for them to give their Evidence by an Oath and thereby implicitly acknowledge themselves to be leavâ—ned with Hypocrisie and swayed with Malice Interest as well as the worst For if Hypocrisie and Wickedness be Reasons of demanding an Oath does not he that in Conformity thereunto takes an Oath acknowledge himself to be Hypocritical and Wicked Is this an Act of Justice and a necâ—ssary one too What sort of Justice is that I pray which makes No Distinction between the Virtuous and the Vicious the True Man and the False the Sincere and the Hypocrite the Good and the Bad but injoyns tâ—e most Sincere and Upright Man to wear the Badge of Hypoâ—â—isie an Oath But suppose this just thâ—n which what can be more remote from Justice yet doth it not answer the End proposed for an Oath doth not bind the Conscience of a man so leavened with Hypocrisie and swayed with Malice Interest c. as he to the Shame of his own Miâ—iâ—try represents the far greater Part of men to be for it is not to be supposed that he that is thus leavened with Hypocrisie and swayâ—d with Malice or Interest will make any more Conscience of false Swearing then of false Speaking â—ut he that will lye in giving in a Solemn Evidence will not stick in Point of Conscience to add an Oath to that Lye if it be required of him This Bishop Gauden was sensible of when he said Nor can iâ—dâ—â—d much Credit be given any more then to a Lyar to any man that swears never so solemnly and in Iudicature who is a Common Swearer and hath no Reverence of the Majâ—sty of God And what Reverence of the Majesty of God shall we suppose those to have who are leavened with Hypocrisie and swayed by Malice or Interest of which Sort he reputes the far greater Part of men to be Yet he faith Multitudes who fear not a Lye dâ—d read the Solemnity of an Oath and the Horror of Perjury but it 's much more probable that such a Sort of men as he hath described do rather dread the outward Penalty for Perjury because the Law intricts severe Punishments on them that forswear themselves whereas Lyars the more is the Pity go Scotfree But otherwise as to a Conscientious Tye how little they regard Perjury who are adicted to Lying is not only evident from the frequent Perjuries committed but also observable from the Testimonies of the Ancients Chrysestein saith He that doth not stick at LYING will not fear SWEARING for he that tells a Lye goes beyond the Truth in his Heart and he that SWEARS falsly passeth over God in his Words what then is the Difference between passing over God and going beyond the Truth seeing God is Truth it self This is the only Difference that when we LYE we pass over the Truth in our Heart and when we FORSWEAR we pass over God in Words for to men we give Satisfaction by words to God by Conscience God himself who forbade Forswearing even he afterwards commanded NOT TO SWEAR He therefore that is not afraid to set light by the Command of God in SWEARING will not be afraid to do the like in FORSWEARING but what wouldst thou have Doth he fear God or doth he not fear him If he be one that feareth God he will not LYE though he be not sworn but if he be one that doth not fear God he cannot speak Truth though he be SWORN Again Thou deceivest thy self O man saith he A man that hath learnt to steal and to wrong a man will oftimes trample also upon an Oath With him consents Isidorus Pelusiota who was Contemporary with Cyril In one of his Epistles writing thus If thou art of our Flock and art ordered under a good Shepherd deny the Nature of wild Beasts and obey his Voice that â—orbiddeth to SWEAR AT ALL. Moreover not to SWEAR is not to REQUIRE AN OATH of another Now if thou wilt not SWEAR neither REQUIRE thou an OATH of another for two Causes â—ither because he who is asked loves Truth or on the contrary to Lye if the man speaks Truth usually he will alwayes speak Truth WITH OUT AN OATH but iâ— he be a LYAR he will LYE though he SWEAR To this agrees that of Erasmus Whosoever dare be bold to lye without Swearing he dares do the same alâ—o when he sweareth if he list But he takest for granted that an Oath is an Act of very great Justice and Charity therefore he saith Seeing the Eâ—ds of Iustice and Charity are so much served by the religious Vse of an Oath would not the abolishing of it derogate from the Honour of Christianity page 62. Answ. First The Ends of Justice and Charity are not served by the Use of an Oath but by the Use of Truth and Sincerity in giâ—ing a true Evidence whether it be with or without an Oath This Truth-speaking is the Substance of the whole matter this answers the Ends of Justice exactly but Oaths are but the Forms of giving Evidence as himselfe confesseth page 62. Secondly The abolishing of an Oath would not degenerate Nay I add the continuing of Oaths doth derogate from the
even in the Priest's own Acâ—oâ—ntâ— For he sayes It was one of the Erroneous Glâ—ssis of the Pharisees that it was lawful at any time to swear by God's Name so that they swore nothing but Truth and performed their Oaths unto the Lord p. 77. and this he acknowledges Christ prohibited p 78. But the Uâ—e and Lawfulneâ—s of Swearing which he sayes remains is when a man is callâ—d by lawful Authority to declare his Conscience in order to the ending of any Controversie wherein his Evidence may â—e concerned pag. 84. Now then let us consider If Paul had sworn which he did not who called him to it who required â—t of him Nay what lawful Authority had the Corinthians over him if they would have done it to require an Oath of him Next What Neâ—d was there of an Oath can any think the Corinthians so incredulous or the Apostle so out of Credit that they would not have believ'd Paul without an Oath especially in a Case of no greater Moment then this was The Priest himself in a Case much more to be doubted layes to his Parishioner I hope you will believe me without an Oath pag. 46. And does he think Paul had not as much Reason to expect the Corinthians would have believed him without an Oath Methinks he might at least allow Paul as much Credit as he takes to himself He confesses pag. 61. If there were that Truth in men that their bare Testimony were of sufficient Credit then there were No Need at all of an Oath And it seems he thinks so well of himself that his bare Testimony was sufficient and therefore hopes his Parishioner wil believe him without an Oath But he is not willing to allow this to Paul No Paul must swear at every turn though none require it of him So that if he will be consistent to himself either he must say that Paul had not that Truth in him that his bare Testimony though in a small matter was of sufficient Credit and therefore that it was Neâ—dful for him in these Cases to swear and so bespatter the Apostle or he must grant that Paul had that Truth in him that his bare Tâ—stimony was of sufficient Credit and therefore that he needed not to have sworn for Swear he sayes he did and so make the Apostle to have sworn needlesly that is even in his own Account unlawfully Besiâ—es that which he sayes is the Vse of an Oath was also wanting in this Case namely Controversie for we read of no Controversie among the Corinthians concerning Paul's Escaping out at a Window into a Basket So that from Top to Bottom this if it had been an Oath had been a false one And the like is to be said of his other Instances Thus he would make the Apostle an Offender not only in swearing at all which I say is Evil but also in swearing Needlesly Vselesly and Vnrequired which he himself sayes is Evil What therefore he hath said concerning Paul's Swearing is not to be believed because it is false nor were to be imitated if it had been true because it had been Evil. Yet he is earnest to have the Instances of Paul taken for Oathes because he saith that in every of them Paul makes a most solemn Appeal to God c. page 70. Answ. If to appeal to God be to swear by God then by the sâ—me Reason to appeal to man or any other thing in the same Sense is to swear by that man or thing that is so appealed to What the Consequence of this would be I will shew him out of his own Book p. 110. He appeals to his Parishioner's Conscience According then to his own Saying he might be said to have Sworn by his Parishioner's Conscience but what would he think of that He knows full well that had been unlawful whensoever Oaths were lawful Again saith he to his Parishioner page 65 I appeal to your own Faculties Here is an Appeal and a Solemn one too for ought appears for he seems to be in earnest yet as eager as he is for Swearing I can hardly think he would offer to Swear by his Parishioner's Faculties But he saith that those mentioned Forms used by Paul were as positive Oaths here again he calls an Oath a Form as he did before in pag. 62. though he will not have it a Ceremony as any other you find in the Bible or any of those that are imposed upon you by the Law of the Land page 72. Answ. Taâ—e notice that none of those Expressions which he hath brought to prove that Paul swore and as many more of the like Nature which with as much Reason he might have brought were used by Paul in any publick Court of Iudicature nor was he called thâ—reto by any Lawful Authority or indeed called at all by any Authority to declare his Conscience in order to the ending of any Controvesie wherein his Evidence was concerned which is the only lawful Vse that the Priest gives of Swearing now under the Gospel page 84. but were only used by Paul in his Communication with his Brethren in the Letters which he writ to them for their Instruction and Edification If therefore in these Instances Paul had sworn he had not sworn judicially and legally but in his ordinary Communication which kind of Swearing viz. in Communication and unrequired by lawful Authority is on all Hands acknowledged and even by this Priest himseâ—f page 76 â—7 to be forbidâ—n by Christ and consequently evil So that to say those Forms of Speech which Paul used are as positive Oaths as any in tâ—e Bible or as any now used in this â—and is no better then if â—e had positively said that Paul did positively sin in Swearing being neither thereto called nor in due Cases But that he and all may see it is not our Judgâ—â—ent only that Paul did not swear I here produce two very authentick witnesses to clear Paul from swearing The first is Basil sâ—rnamed the great who himself refused to swear at the Council of Chalcedon and commended Clinias a Greek for suffering a Fine of three Talents which he might have avoided if he would have sworn He upon Psalm 15. saith There are some speeches which have the Forms of Oaths and yet are NO OATHS at all but rather Remedies to perswade He instances in Ioseph and the Apostle Paul of which last he saith The Apostle willing to shew his Love to the Corinthians said By the glorying of you which I have in Christ Iesus our Lord for he did not dâ—part from the Doctrine of the Gospel c. thus Basil. The other is Gregory Nazianzen in his Dialogue against Swearing thus B. But Paul also swore as they say A. Who said so O what a vain â—angler was he that said it quoth he God is my Witness and God knoweth Those Words are not an Oath but a certain Asseveration c. Thus Nazianzen So that if what I have said before were not sufficient
By this he seems not rightly to understand how the Apostles and primitive Christians received the Knowledge of the Gospel for he is still harping upon the Gift of Tongues and Miracles as if he apprehended they had received the Knowledge of the Gospel by these means and that therefore it is Presumption in any now to expect to receive the Knowledge of the Gospel in the same manner as they received it but in this he greatly errs not distinguishing between the Effects and the Cause Tongues and Miracles were but the Effects of that divine Power wherewith they were filled of that holy Spirit which rested on them and dwelled in them Now the Apostles did not receive the Knowledge of the Gospel by Tongues and Miracles these were but Mediums to convey their Message to others and perswade a Belief of it but that which they received the Knowledge of the Gospel from was the Divine Power it self the Holy Spirit it self which dwelt in them from which the Tongues and Miracles did sometimes flow I say sometimes for they were not inseparable Effects of the Spirit for if they had been so then when and wheresoever the Spirit had appeared these Effects must unavoidably have followed but that they did not for all the true Believers received the Spirit yet did not all work Miracles nor speak with Tongues Thus Paul having told the Corinthians that the God of the World hath blinded the Minds of them that believe not lest the Light of the glorius Gospel of Christ who is the Image of God should shine unto them shews them how the Knowledge of the Gospel is to be received for God saith he who commanded the Light to shine out of Darkness hath shined in our Hearts to give the Light of the Knowledge of the Glory of God in the Face of Iesus Christ. And in his Epistle to the Galatians he plainly shews that he received the Knowledge of the Gospel and Ability to preach Christ from the Revelation of Christ in him Seeing then that the Apostles and primitive Christians did receive the Knowledge of the Gospel from the immediate Teachings of the holy Spirit which dwelt in them and not from Tongues or Miracles and seeing this holy Spirit as I have before proved was promised to abide with the Saints forever to be their Teacher and Guide into all Truth I thence infer that the Cessation of Tongues and Miracles doth not at all render it any Presumption Vngodliness or Absurdity in those who are the Apostles Successors in Faith and Doctrine to expect to receive the Knowledge of the Gospel now in the same manner as it was communicated to them of old Yet that he may not seem wholely to exclude the Spirit he thus saith That the Spirit helpeth us to understand old Truths already revealed in Scripture we confess and pray for his Assistance therein c. page 103. Answ. Either he doth not speak sincerely or else he hath forgot himself but a little before page 92 93 94. he said that All the necessary Points of Religion whatsoever is necessary to Salvation whatsoever is either to be believed or done is in some Place or other in the holy Scriptures fitted to the most vulgar Capacity and shallowest Vnderstanding that the History of Chist's Birth Death Resurrection and Ascention is plain to be understood that the Duties of the first and second Table of the Law and the Love of God and our Neighbour which I have elsewhere shew'd comprehends the whole Law and the Prophets all the Evangelical Precepts and the Essentials of Religion are in the Gospel made 〈◊〉 easie Doctrines that he that runs may read them being fitted to the Capacity of the most unlearned that those Passages in the Scriptures which are of the greatest Concern are written in such a plain and familiar Style that the weakest and most illiterate shall never be able to excuse the neglect of them In a Word The great Law-giver he saith hath made those Doctrines most plain which are most necessary to be believed and those least necessary which are most difficult Now if he did believe himself when he said all this I wonder what he expects his Reader should believe of him when in behalf of himself and all his Brethren he here saith page 103. we confess the Spirit helpeth us to understand old Truths already revealed in the Scriptures and we pray for his Assistance therein Do they pray for the Assistance of the Spirit to help them understand those things which he saith are already fitted to the Capacity of the weakest most illiterate and unlearned which are suited to the shallowest Vnderstanding nay which are made so plain and easie that he that runs may read them What else were this but to mock the holy Ghost by invocating his Assistance to help them understand that which they confess they understand already and which they affirm to be so plain and easie that the weakest the shallowest the most unlearned may understand And yet of this kind do they reckon all necessary Points in Religion all the Duties of the first and second Table of the Law the Love of God and our Neighbour the History of Christ's Birth Death Resurrection and Ascension all the Commands of the Gospel all the Essentials of Religion and in short whatsoever is either to be believed or done necessary to Salvation but what then hath he left for bimself and his Brethren to pray for the Assistance of the Spirit to help them to understand Nothing that is necessary to Salvation to be sure no Essential of Religion no Gospel Precept no Part of the History of Christ's Birth Death Resurrection and Ascension none of the Duties of the first or second Table nothing of the Love of God or our Neighbour what can it be then Some difficult Passages which himself confesseth are least necessary to be believed as the Circumstances of the Levitical Rites the Genealogies in Scripture and Apocalyptical Propheâ—ies these are his own Instances page 93. nay in order to Salvation not at all necessary either to be believed or done See now what his fair Flourish of Praying for the Spirit is come to Besides to say they are already 〈◊〉 in Scripture and yet say he want the assistance of the Spirit to help him understand them is a Contradiction for what he doth not understand is not already revealed but vailed to him if he already understand it he in vain implores Assistance to help him to understand it if he doth not already understand it then it is not yet revealed to him but hid or covered from him in praying for the Assistance of the Spirit to understand it he acknowledgeth the Necessity of the Spirit 's Teaching and confesseth that Revelation is to be expected in this Age. But saith he to pretend to such Miraculous Inspirations as the Apostles once had or to nâ—w Revelations beyond what was discoverâ— to them is an horrible Cheat c. Answ
That the Inspirations which the Apostles had or the Teaching of the Spirit whereby the mind of God was communicated to them had no Dependency upon Miracles I have shewed before As for New Revelations it is a Phrase of his own not used by us and if by New he intend New as to Substance he doth not rightly represent us for we do not expect a Revelation of any other Gospel of any other Way of Salvation of any other Essâ—ntials in the Christian Religion then what were revealed to the primitive Christians and have been in all Ages revealed to the â—aints in 〈◊〉 Dâ—gree or other and which by the divinely inspired Penmen were committed to writing and are declared of in the holy Scriptures but as no Prophecy of old â—ime came by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost so nâ—ither can the true Sense and Meaning of thoâ—e heavenly Doctrines contained in the holy â—criptures be comprehended or understood by the Wit and Wisdom of man in his highest Natural Attainments but only alone by the Openings and Discoveries of that holy Spirit by which they were at first revealed Those divine Mysteries are Mysteries indeed and remain so as a sealed Book which neither the unlearned nor yet the most learned in the wisdom of this World is able by that Learning to open until Christ the Lamb doth open them And these Heavenly things and divine Mysteries so opened by him who hath the Key of David wherewith he openeth and no man shutteth and shutteth and no man with all his humane Learning openeth are not New Revelations that is New things revealed but rather renewed Revelations that is Old things revealed anew The same Gospel the same Way of Salvation the same Essentials of Religion the same Principles and Doctrine in a word the same Good Old Truths which were revealed to the Saints of old and are recorded in the holy Scriptures revealed now anew And this Revelation is absolutely necessary for without it there is no true no certain no living Knowledge of God the Father or of Jesus Christ his Son This our Saviour told the Iews No man sayes he knoweth the Son but the Father neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him Humane Learning cannot do it Nor can the Doctrines of the Gospel or the Mysteries of God's Kingdom be known to man but by the Revâ—lation of the Holy Spirit Humane Learning cannot discover them for The things of God saith Paul knoweth no man but the Spirit of God Perhaps the Priest will say They are revealed in the Scriptures But I shall then tell him That Revelation is necessary yea of Necessity even to understand the Scriptures For he himself observes p. 96. that it is not the Letter but the Sense that is the Word of God If so it is not enough for any man to have and read the Letter only though he spend his Age therein but if he expect profit thereby he must come to the true Sense which how learned soever he be in the Wisdom of this World he never can attain unto until the holy Spirit reveal it to him And to this purpose must his own words serve if they will serve to any purpose at all namely We confess that the Spirit helpeth us to understand old Truths already revealâ—d iâ— Scripture and we pray for his Assistance therein pag. 103. In which words though he mistakes in saying they are revealed already to him that doth not understand them yet by confessing that the Spirit doth help to understand and praying for his Assistance therein he acknowledges that the Truths contained in the Scriptures are to be revealed by the Spirit Having promised this I hold my self the less concern'd to take notice of what he sayes concerned new Revelations because he speaks upâ—n a false Ground and shoots at random Yet some things scattered here and there in his Discourse I may speak briefly to to make him more sensible of his Mistakes 1 st He says These New Revelations highly disparage the Scriptures Answ. He that desires and waits to have the Truth 's Record in the Scriptures revealed to him by the same Spirit from which they were written doth not at all disparage the Scriptures but honours them But he sayes The Scripture if it be true and may be believed declares it self to be a perfect and sufficient Rule in order to Salvation 2 Tim. 3.17 Answ. The Scripture so far as it hath escaped Corruption from Mis-transcribing Mis-translating Mis-printing and the like is true and not only may but ought to be believed But I do not find it declares that of it self which he hath here declared of it from 2 Tim. 3.17 namely that it is a perfect and sufficient Rule in order to Salvation That place sayes thus Vers. 16. for the 17th Verse depends on that and is imperfect without it All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness Vers. 17. That the Man of God may be perfect throughly furnisht unto all Good Works Now to let pass the Translation which is not altogether so well as it might be here is no mention of a Rule at â—ll The Scripture is here said to be profitable but I hope the Priest will not say every thing that is profitable is a perfect and sufficient Rule He sayes humane Learning is profitable and not only so but necâ—ssary yea of Necessity to the Understanding Preaching the Gospel will he therefore make humane Learning the Rule But how regardless is this man of speaking Truth who so confidently sayes the Scripture declares it self to be a perfect and sufficient Rule in order to Salvation whenaâ— that Scripture which he brings to prove this hath no such words in it But he adds That the Scripture accurses all that shall preach any other Doctrine Gal. 1.8 9. Answ. If he means any other Doctrine then this which he has preached concerning the Scripture being a perfect and sufficient Rule he errs and wrongs the Text. For the Apostle there sayes If any man preach any â—â—her Gâ—spel unto you then that we haâ—e preached and you have received let him be acursed And so say I He that preaches any other Gospel then what was then preached by the Apostle the Curse and Wo is to him But let me withal tell my Adversary he did unadvisedly to bring these two Scriptures together For in that to Timothy the Apostle saith That the Man of God may be perfect but that the Priest denyes it is possible for him to be So that he preaches not only another but a directly contrary Doctrine to what the Apostle preacht Let him look again then and consider whether he has not brought the Curse to his own Door Again he sayes pag. 104. Consider how contrary these new Revelations are to God's
thing and speak another But if the Letter be not the Word of God how can the Bible be the Word of God seeing the Bible is only the Book wherein the Letter is written Yet does this man so confound and jumble them together that it is hard to know what at last he intends to be the Word of God One while he sayes it is not the Letter but the Sense that is the Word of God by and by he sayes The Bible is the Word of God as if he took the Bible in which the Letter is written to be the Sense of the Letter for he makes the Bible and the Sense of the Letter to be one and the same thing namely the Word of God But the Word of God which is quick and powerful he appears to be a Stranger to But he asks Whence we know that the Word of God is Quick and Lively Answ. By Experience For though he being with the Iews in the Unbelief has never peradventure heard the Voice of God at any time yet blessed be the Lord we have and when the Lord hath spoken in us we have felt his Word living and powerful discerning and discovering the Most Secret Thoughts and Intents of our Hearts But this Answer I conclude will not answer his End He has fitted an Answer to his own Design and put it into his Parishioner's Mouth to speak as for us which is That We learn out of the Bible that the Word of God is Quick and Lively Whereupon as apprehending some Advantage he layes about him with all his Might What! sayes he Out of that Bible which they call a Dead Letter and so goes on for three or four pages together in such an insulting strain as if he had gotten some petty Conquest and were now riding in Triumph But a Wise Man would have defer'd his Boasting until he had put his Armour off That the Bible barely as it is a Book is a Dead Thing that the Scriptures barely as Writings are Dead Letters none I think that considers what he sayes and dareâ— put his Name to it will deny But sayes he Though the Leaves and Letters have no Natural Life in them is therefore the Sense of the Scriptures dead No say I The true Sense and Meaning of the Scriptures is not dead But that Sense which man by his Natural Understanding and Humane Learning only doth invent and form to himself as if he had it from the Scriptures is dead for the true Sense and Meaning of the Scripture is received and understood in by the Openings and Revelation of the Divine Spirit and not otherwise Now we never call the Scriptures a dead Letter in disâ—respect to or dis-esteem of the Scriptures but to manifest the Mistake and Error of those who think it sufficient that they have the Scriptures although they dâ—ny the Revelation of the Spirit by which alone the true Sense and Meaning of the Scriptures can be understood And though the Scriptures without the Spirit be a Dead Letter yet being opened explained applyed and the true Sense of them given by the Spirit they are then truly serviceable and profiâ—able for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness and may be so used by them that are led and guided by the Spirit without any of those Absurdities which this man irreligiously would fasten on them Besides when the Bible is called a Dead Letter it is as in his Book in Opposition to them that call it the Word of God as this Man expresly doth in the very same page 107 though to his own Contradiction he had said but a few Leaves before pag. 96. It is not the Letter but the Sense that is the Word of God So that although he will not have the Letter to be the Word of God but the Sense yet by an incomparable Piece of Ignorance and Self-contradiction he will have the Bible or Book to be the Word of God as if the Book wherein the Letter it written were the Sense of the Letter Thus all his great Bluster and Vapour against others ends in the Detection of his own Confusion He sayes pag. 112. To look for more Revelations or a Repetition of the former would be equally an Act of Impudence and Infidelity Why of Impudence and Infidelity He replies Would it not be an Act of Infidelity not to believe God when he plainly tells us that the Scriptures themselves are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith c. and to furnish us throughly to all good Works Answ. He corrupts the Scripture Where doth God plainly tell him that the Scriptures themselves are able c This word themselves he puts in of his own Head and yet sayes God tells us plainly that the Scriptures themselves are able c. wherein he speaks Untruth of God If this be not Infidelity yet it looks as like Impudence as I have seen If the Scriptures themselves were able to make wise unto Salvation through Faith c. there were then no Need of the Help of the Spirit But I have already shewed that unless the Spirit reveal and open them the Scriptures themselves cannot be rightly understood And he himself in saying The spirit doth help them to understand them and that they pray for its Assistance therein pag. 103. doth implicitly acknowledge as much But if there be a Necessity of the spirit 's Teaching in order to a right understanding of the Scriptures then it is evident that the Scriptures themselves are not able to make wise c. without the Help and Assistance i. e. the Teaching and Revelation of the Spirit Whether then it can be an Act of Infidelity to expect that which there is so great a Necessity of that men cannot be wise unto Salvation without it I leave to the Reader 's Judgment Nay let it be well considered seeing Christ hath plainly and expresly told us That he will send the Comforter the spirit of Truth to his Disciples that this spirit shall be in them and shall abide with them forever that he shall testifie of Christ that he shall take of Christ's and shew it unto them that he shall teach them all things and guide them into all Truth as appears in the 14 15 16. Chapters of Iohn I say let it be well considered whether it is not an Act of Infidelity in any who profess themselves to be Christ's Disciples not to believe and expect the Performance of this so absolute a Promise Thus far as to the Infidelity of expecting to have the Truths formerly revealed to the Saints revealed now to us by the same spirit by which they were then revealed unto them which I take to be the Meaning of that Phrase of his a Repetition of the former Revelations Now to the Act of Impudence for he sayes To look for a Repetition of the former Revelations would be equally an Act of Impudence and Infidelity And is it not an Act of Impudence sayes he