Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed no less to the Principles of the Christian Doctrin of Christ and Oracles of God which therefore by his Argument being Elements are to be thrown aside As for his other Arguments in those two Treatises against the outward Baptism and the Supper they are no other that I can find but such as are above mentioned in my Reply to those of William Penn and Robert Barclay and therefore one Answer will serve both to them and him PART II. SECT I. The Arguments against the outward Supper examined and Refuted THus having finished my Examination and Refutation of the Arguments of the above mentioned Persons against Water-Baptism and the outward Supper in general I think fit to bring to the like Examination what R.B. hath more particularly Argued against the outward Supper as being not any longer to continue but until Christ's inward coming to arise in their Hearts and give a plain Refutation of the same In the beginning of the Chapter or Head wherein he discourseth concerning the Body and Blood of Christ although he saith truly that the Communion i.e. the Participation thereof is inward and Spiritual yet he was under a great mistake to affirm that the said Body and Blood of Christ whereof true Believers do participate is only inward which he afterwards explains to be that Light and Seed in every Man as he expresseth plainly in several places as p. 61 of the above said Treatise and p. 65 where he saith and that Christ understands the same things here viz. John 6. by his Body Flesh and Blood which is understood John 1. by the light hath enlighteneth every man and the life c. And p. 77. he chargeth it to be an Error to make the Communion or Participation of the Body Flesh and Blood of Christ to relate to that outward Body Vessel or Temple that was Born of the Virgin Mary and walked and Suffered in Judea whereas it should relate to the Spiritual Body Flesh and Blood of Christ even that Heavenly and Celestial Light and Life which was the Food and Nourishment of the Regenerate in all Ages as we have said he already proved Ans In this he was in a great Error to make the Eating or Participation of Christs Flesh and Blood to have no relation to Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood that was Born of the Virgin and Suffered Death for our Sins on the Tree of the Cross For the Regeneration of Believers and Justification with all the Spiritual Blessings of Life and Light and inward Divine Virtue and Might wherewith they are inwardly Refreshed and Nourished by Christ hath a most near and immediate Relation to Christ's outward Body and Blood and to his coming in that outward Body because that most Holy and Perfect Obedience of Christ which he performed in that Body and became Obedient to the Death of the Cross was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of all that inward Grace Virtue Light and Life whereby Regeneration was wrought in any in any Age of the World either before or since Christ came in the Flesh as well as it was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of their Justification and the Remission of their Sins For Christ Died as well for the Sins of those who lived in the Ages before he came in the Flesh as since and they had the same Benefits by his Death and by his Body and Blood that we have the same inward Grace and Light to Regenerate them as the same Mercy and Favour to Justifie them and give them the Remission of their Sins which they received through Faith in Christ as he was to come in the Flesh without them and whole Christ is the Food of true Believers I mean Christ not only considered as the Word simply but as the Word made Flesh And having taken or assumed the Seed of Abraham and the true Nature of Man into such a high Union as that the Godhead of the Word and the Manhood assumed thereby is but one Christ and as such is the Food of all true Believers both as he outwardly came in the Flesh and as he is inwardly come the Light and the Life in them and Believers Eating of Christ is their Believing in him and by their Faith being United to him and he to them so that he dwells in them and they in him And though it may be owned that Believers Feeding upon Christ's Light and Life Metaphorically and Allegorically speaking that Light and Life may be called according to Scripture Meat and Drink and Flesh and Blood of Christ as it hath many other such Metaphorical Names such as Milk Honey Wine Marrow and Fatness Oyl c. All which Names are given because of Men's Weakness and that they have not proper Words to express Divine Things by yet that ought not to make us reject and lay aside Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to the Saints feeding upon him Nor do the Arguments brought by R.B. here prove in the least what he intends as the following Examination of them will sufficiently I hope manifest He begins with a Quotation out of Augustine in his Tractat Psalm 98. The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life understand spiritually what I have spoken ye shall not eat of this body which ye see and drink this blood which they shall spill that shall crucifie me I am the living bread which have descended from heaven he called himself the bread which descended from heaven exhorting that they might believe in him c. Ans It is evident from these last Words that by Eating Augustine meant in one Sense Corporal Eating and in another Sense Believing as elsewhere Tract 25. ad cap. 6. Johan Hoc est opus Dei ut quid paras dentem ventrem crede manducasti Credere enim in eum hocest comedere panem vinum qui credit in eum manducat eum in English thus why preparest thou thy Teeth and Belly believe and thou hast eat for to believe in him is to eat the Bread and Wine who believeth in him eateth him Both these Quotations are good against the Papists who hold that Believers eat the Body of Christ Corporally with their Mouths but say nothing against this Spiritual Way of Eating Christs Body but plainly confirm it The plain Sense therefore of Augustin's Words Quoted by R.B. is this Ye shall not eat Corporally with the outward Mouth the Body of Christ which ye see but ye shall eat it Spiritually that is believe with a sincere Faith which the Spirit of God worketh in you that Christ shall give his Body that ye see speaking then to the Jews to be broken for you and his Blood even the Blood of that Body to be shed for you And in so Believing ye shall eat my Body and drink my Blood that is ye shall be united to me and I to you that I shall abide in you and
the sort of Bread and Wine to be used c. Answered SECT VI. Sheweth R.B. his Mistake that the Eating in these Words Take Eat c. do this in remembrance of me was their common Eating The continuance of the Supper Argued from 1. Cor. 11.23 c. That the coming of Christ meant in these Words until he come is his outward and last coming at the end of the World SECT VII Containeth three Reasons That by his coming 1 Cor. 11.26 is meant his outward coming SECT VIII Containeth three other Reasons for the same R.B. his Argument from the Syriack Translation in 1. Cor. 11.26 c. Answered SECT IX Containeth R.B. his last Argument against the outward Baptism and Supper Answered respecting the Power to Administer them as whether Mediate or Immediate The Collective Body of the Protestant Churches may by Allusion or an Hypothesis besaid to answer to the Church of Sardis which was not blamed for Idolatry but otherwayes An Advice to all sincere Christians agreeing in Fundamentals to own one another as Brethren SECT X. Sheweth that many in the Protestant Churches can give greater Evidence of their true inward Call to the Ministry than many of the Teachers among the Quakers Want of due Administrators no Argument against Baptism and the Supper An Advertisement concerning W. Del's Book against Baptism Good Advice to the Quakers concerning those Institutions SECT XI Containeth some Arguments of G. Fox and Humphry Norton with their Answers and some dreadful Words of Humphry Norton against our Saviour's last coming though the Man was highly commended by E. Burrough and F. Howgil Great Teachers among the Qaukers SECT XII Containeth some Scripture Proofs shewing that Baptism and the Supper are Institions of Christ PART I. SECT I. An Impartial Examination and Refutation of their Arguments against Water-Baptisme IN a Book of George Whitehead's whose Title is The Authority of the true Ministry in Baptizing with the Spirit and the Idolatry of such Men as are doting about Shadows and Carnal Ordinances here note his severe Charge p. 13. he bringeth three Reasons or Arguments to prove that in the Commission which Christ gave to his Discipless in Matth. 29.19 Mark 16.18 Water-Baptisme was not intended but the Baptisme of the Spirit His first Argument is If the Baptisme which Christ commanded in Matth. 28.19 Mark 16.16 was a Baptisme without which a Man cannot be saved then it was not the Baptisme of outward Water for Water-Baptisme is not of necessity to Salvation neither is there any stress for Salvation laid upon is but it was that Baptisme without which Men cannot be saved which Christ commanded Matth. 28. therefore not Water-Baptisme I prove saith he the Minor Proposition thus No man can be saved without being Baptized into the Name of God and his Son Christ Jesus for his Name is the Word of God by which Salvation comes and by no other Name and the Lord is one and his Name one and it was into his Name that the Disciples were commanded to Baptize People Ans Here G. Whitehead would appear to be some body in Logick though it is judged by many of his Brethren to be little better than a piece of the black Art but he has in this sufficiently discovered his Ignorance both in true Divinity and true Logick The Fallacy of his Argument is in this apparent that in his supposed Proof of that he calleth the Minor Proposition he confoundeth Baptisme into the Name and the Name it self for saith he his Name is the word of God by which Salvation comes But though Salvation cometh by the word of God and none can be saved without that Word yet it doth not follow that none can be saved without such a Baptisme as the Apostles did Baptize with into the Name of that Word for as they were to Baptize into the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Name of the Father c. So they were to Teach in that Name but this proves not that they were not to teach outwardly and they were to work Miracles in that Name it doth not therefore follow that they were not to work outward Miracles visible to Men's outward sight Again G. Whitehead useth the Name word of God in a too narrow and limited Sense for the full Name of Christ is not the word only but the word made Flesh or the word having assumed the true Nature of Man and that by the Name of Christ here is understood the Name of the Man Christ who was Crucified is clear from Paul's words to the Corinthians Was Paul Crucified for you or were ye Baptized into the Name of Paul Signifying that they were Baptized into the Name of Christ Crucified which hath a necessary Relation to the Man Christ and to Christ considered as truly as Man as God and thought the word is a Name proper to the Son yet it is not the Name either of the Father or of the Holy Ghost for that were to confound and wholly to destroy the distinction of the Relative Properties of Father Son and Holy Ghost which was the Sabellian Heresie The Minor thereof of his Argument is Fallaciously proved by him and his Assertion is false viz. That the Baptisme without which Men cannot be saved was the Baptisme which Christ Commanded to the Apostles if by the words cannot be saved he means absolutely impossible for he hath not in the least proved that it was not Water-Baptisme which Christ Commanded but whereas his Argument seemeth to depend on this that becomes Water-Baptisme is not absolutely necessary to Salvation therefore Christ did not Command it But he should learn better to distinguish things absolutely necessary to Salvation and things necessary in some respect and very profitable though not of absolute necessity and the like distinction G. Whitehead must allow with respect to his and his Brethrens Ministry Preaching and Writing which they suppose Christ has Commanded them and yet he will not say his and their Ministry Preaching and Writing is absolutely necessary to any Man's Salvation Besides it doth absolutely contradict G. Whitehead's declared Principle concerning the Sufficiency of the Light within every Man to Salvation without any thing else to affirm that Men could not be saved unless the Apostles had Baptized them according to Christ's Command even supposing it had been the Baptisme of the Spirit which the Apostles had been Commanded to Administer for this World have made the Salvation of Men depend upon the Ministry of Apostles and their Successors in the outward Exercise of their Spiritual Gift of Preaching and Prayer now before the Apostles Administred this Baptisme suppose it be that of the Spirit the Men to whom they were sent had the Light in them which was sufficient to Salvation without any thing else according to G. Whitehead's Doctrine and consequently without all Ministry of the Apostles and had they never heard or seen the Apostles or any other Men had they given due Attendance and Obedience to
is betwixt the Husband and the Wife who are said to be one Flesh This is a great Mystery said Paul but I speak concerning Christ and the Church who according to Paul's Doctrine as they are one Spirit so they are one Flesh And as elsewhere he said we are of his Flesh and of his Bone and forasmuch as the Children were partakers of Flesh and Blood he took part of the same wherefore he is not ashamed to call them Brethren Now in this R.B. was in a great Error that by his thus excluding the Flesh of Christ's outward Body from being any means of the Saints Communion with God he excludes the said Body of Christ from being any necessary part of the Mediator and at this rate of his Arguing only the Divine Light or Seed in Men is the Mediator betwixt God and Men but according to the Doctrine of the Apostle Paul the Mediator of God and Men who is one is the Man Christ Jesus and by the Man Christ Jesus is understood in Scripture not the Spirit only nor the Soul of his Manhood only but the Body also together with the Soul even Jesus Christ made of the Seed of David according to the Flesh And as really as there is a Relative Union betwixt Brethren and near Kindred with respect to their Flesh and Blood on which account it is said Concerning Joseph Gen. 37.27 He is our Brother and our Flesh and 2 Sam. 5.1 The Tribes of Israel said unto David behold we are thy Bone and thy Flesh So believing Gentiles as well as believing Jews may say concerning the Man Christ who is the Seed of the Woman of whom to wit Eve we are all descended we are his Bone and Flesh and because he hath taken Flesh and Blood like unto us therefore in that very respect he is compleatly qualified and fitted to be our Mediator and High Priest with God by whom because of the true Nature of Man consisting of a true reasonable Soul and true and real Body of Man which the Eternal Word is united unto we have Communion with God His fourth and last Argument hath the like Defect with the former That which Feedeth upon it shall never Dye but the Bodies of all Men once Dye Ans Men are said in Scripture to Dye though the Soul Dyeth not yet Men are said to Dye because the Vital Union of the Soul with the Body is Dissolved which being but for a Time and that a very small Time as a Moment in respect of Eternity and after that their Bodies shall be raised up again and Vitally be United to their Souls therefore by the contrary Argument by the Flesh of Christ that the Saints Feed upon must be meant in part his outward Body of Flesh now Glorified which is a Glorious Spiritual Body because the Resurrection of Christ's Body is the Ground of the Saints Hope wrought in them by the Spirit of Christ that their Bodies shall be raised up and shall together with their Souls inherit Eternal Life And to conclude this whole Matter when Christ said it is the Spirit that Quickneth the Flesh profits nothing His meaning is that according to their Carnal and Fleshly Sense it doth not profit as if he had said it would profit you nothing to Eat my Flesh as ye imagin by the Bodily Mouth but to Eat it Spiritually and by Faith this doth profit but to take the Words the Flesh profits nothing in the Sense that some take them is most Blasphemous as to say Christ's outward Body of Flesh profits nothing to our Salvation for this would make his Coming and Death for us in the Flesh to have been in vain and also would render our Faith Vain that he did so come yea so necessary was Christ's coming in the Flesh for our Salvation that it is by his Flesh and Soul Constituting his Manhood that we have his Spirit the Man Christ is that Olive Tree consisting of Soul and Body United Personally to the Godhead of the Eternal Word which giveth us the Oyl of the Holy Spirit and poureth it into our Hearts and as in the Natural Olive Tree it is by its Body that we have of its Oyl or Spirit and when we Eat of its Oyl we are said to Eat of the Tree because the Tree yields us its Oyl even as when we Eat of an Apple or Drink the Fruit of it or of the Vine we may be said to Eat of the Apple-Tree and Vine-Tree the Fruit being what the Tree naturally yields so the Man Christ consisting of Soul and Body is that Precious Olive Tree and Vine-Tree that yields us the Oyl and Wine of the Holy Spirit and pours it into our Hearts who Believe in him and Love him and as Effectual as his Soul and Flesh of his Manhood is now to Believers for their receiving the Spirit by the same since he came in the Flesh no less Effectual it was to Believers before he came in the Flesh even from the beginning of the World according to B. Jewel's Words he was not come in the Flesh yet they Eat his Flesh to wit by Faith he had not Shed his Blood yet they Drank his Blood viz. by Faith and both his Flesh and his Blood before it had any visible Being or Existence together with his Soul was Effectual to Believers in all Ages for their Reception of the Spirit and all Spiritual Blessings of Justification and Sanctification c. as well before he came in the Flesh as since And thus he was the Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World whose Death was of the same Efficacy from the beginning and will be to the end of the World to all that believe in him And as God is the giver of the Spirit and of all the Graces of the Spirit so he giveth it to Believers by and through Christ even the Man Christ who is both the Procurer and Dispenser of all that Grace that God giveth unto them and though Men most properly Eat the Meat and Drink the Drink that is bought with Money yet in ordinary Speech by a common Metonymy they are said to Eat and Drink the Money that buyeth it as the Poor Widows two Mites were called her Living so after some sort though the inward Life and Spirit of Christ be the most immediate Food of the Souls of Believers Yet because the Flesh of Christ as it was broken for us and his Blood as it was Shed for us is the Price and Purchase Money which hath procured to us the inward Life and Spirit of Christ with the various Graces and Gifts thereof therefore we are said to Eat his Flesh and Drink his Blood by the Like Metonymy But there is much more in this Great Mystery than can be demonstrated by these Similitudes and Examples or any others of the like Nature SECT IV. P. 77. R.B. chargeth it as another Error which he calleth a General Error wherein he saith they all agree viz. both Papists and
The ARGUMENTS OF THE QUAKERS More particularly Of George Whitehead William Penn. Robert Barclay John Gratton George Fox Humphry Norton And my own AGAINST Baptism and the Supper Examined and Refuted ALSO Some clear Proofs from Scripture shewing that they are Institutions of Christ under the Gospel WITH An APPENDIX Containing some Observations upon some Passages in a Book of W. Penn called A Caveat against Popery And on some Passages of a Book of John Pennington called The Fig Leaf Covering Discovered By George Keith 1. John 4.1 Beloved believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God Chrysost Homil. on Matthew If thou hadst been without a Body God had given the things naked and without a Body but because the Soul is planted in the Body he gives thee intelligible things in things sensible London Printed for C. Brome at the Gun at the West-End of St. Paul's Church-yard 1698. TO THE READER DIvers Weighty Reasons have induced me to this Undertaking One whereof chiefly is that whereas most of these Men have not only run out with bitter Invectives against these Divine Institutions but have Fathered their Bold Opposition to them upon the Holy Spirit as they commonly do their other Gross Errors a Witness whereof is W. Penn in his Book against Thomas Hicks called Reason against Railing who saith in p. 109. concerning these Institutions We can testifie from the same Spirit by which Paul Renounced Circumcision that they are to be rejected as not now required Now if upon due Tryal their Arguments they have used and still use against them are found to be Vain and Invalid Grounded upon gross Wrestings and Perversions of Holy Scripture and that it be proved by sound Arguments that they were and are true Divine Institutions under the pure Gospel Dispensation not only their too Credulous Followers but the Teachers themselves such of them as are alive may have occasion to reflect upon the Spirit which had acted their first Leaders to oppose those things as well as other great Truths of the Gospel and thereby discern that it was not the Spirit of God but a Spirit of Untruth and may judge it forth from among them and be humbled before the Lord for entertaining it Another Reason is which is indeed my chiefest Reason That whereas I had formerly been Swayed and Byassed by the undue Opinion I had of their chief Teachers and Leaders who had Printed Books long before I came among them as being greatly indued with Divine Revelations and Inspirations and that I too Credulously believe their Bold and False Asseverations that what they had said and Printed against the outward Baptism and outward Supper was given forth from the Spirit of Truth in them by means whereof I had been drawn into the same Error as many other well meaning and simple Hearted Persons have been and still are by them to oppose these Divine Institutions and have in some of my Printed Books used some of the same Arguments which they had used I having in a Measure of Sincerity I hope Repented and been humbled before the Lord for that my said Error whereof I have given a Publick Acknowledgment in Print in my late Book called George Keith's Explications and Retractions and wherein I have not only Retracted my Errors in Relation to outward Baptism and the Supper but in Relation also to divers other Particulars therein mentioned but withal holding close to my Testimony in all Principles of Christian Faith and Doctrin delivered by me in any of my former Books I judged it my Duty besides my Publick Acknowledgment and Retracttation of the Error to endeavour according to the Ability given me of God of a better Understanding to undeceive and reduce from the said Error any into whose Hands my Books have come Treating on that Subject who have been deceived or hurt by them For as the Law of God requireth Restitution for any Wrong done to a Neighbour in Worldly Matters so I judge it no less requireth the like in Spirituals And as the Law required an Eye for an Eye the Gospel requireth that whom we have in any degree been accessory to Blind or Misinform their Understandings we should labour to our outmost Ability after we are better Enlightened our selves to Enlighten and duly Inform them so far as God shall be pleased to make us his Instruments in so doing to whom it chiefly belongs Know therefore Friendly Reader that what Arguments I have used in any of my Books against the outward Baptism and Supper particularly in that called Truth 's Defence and in another called The Presbyterian and Independent visible Churches in New England and elsewhere brought to the Test Cap. 10. and in another called The pretended Antidote proved Poison and in another called A Refutation of Pardon Tillinghast who pleadeth for Water-Baptism its being a Gospel Precept As I hereby declare them to be void and null so I do in this following Treatise shew the Nullity and Invalidity of them by answering not only them but divers others of other Persons together with them as above named in the Title Page of this Treatise And so far as the Arguments are the same which both they and I have used one Answer will serve to both though I never was so blind as not to see the Weakness of divers Reasons of some of their Great Authors against these Institutions But the Truth is divers of their Weakest and most Impertinent Arguments I never heard nor read till of late that Providence brought to my hand some of their Books I never heard of before The CONTENTS SECT I. Containeth a Correction of R.B. his great Mistake That the Eating Christ's Flesh John 6. hath no Relation to Christ's outward Flesh The Quotation of Augustine vindicated from his Mistake SECT II. Containeth a Vindication of B Jewel's words on Jos 6.1 2 3. from the Great Misconstruction that W. Penn hath put on them contrary to B. Jewel's intended Sense R.B. his Arguments to prove that the Flesh of Christ John 6.53 hath no Relation to his outward Flesh Answered SECT III. Containeth a Correction of two Unsound Assertions of R.B. concerning Christ's Flesh and Blood SECT IV. Sheweth R. B's Mistake in saying that both Papists and Protestants tye the Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ to the outward Sign of Bread c. And his other Mistake that the whole end of the Paschal Lamb was to signifie the Jews and keep them in remembrance of their Deliverance out of Aegypt The true Sense of Paul's words given The Bread which we break c. 1. Cor. 10.16 SECT V. Sheweth R.B. his Mistake as if the Cup of the Lord and Table of the Lord 1. Cor. 10.21 did not signifie the use of Bread and Wine c. His Reasons against it proved invalid His Argument from the Custom of the Jews using Bread and Wine at the Passover Answered His other Arguments from the supposed difficulties about the time of practising it
ye shall abide in me which Sense doth evidently agree with our Saviour's Words John 6.29 47. And indeed to Exclude Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to this place of Scripture as no way concerned in the Sense of these Words of it John 6.53 is plainly to Exclude Christ as he outwardly came in that outward Body from being the Object of our Christian Faith for seeing Eating here signifieth Believing by Agustine's Quotation approved by R.B. if this Spiritual Eating which is our Believing respects not the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain then Christ as he came and Suffered in that Body is no Object of the Christian Faith which is most absurb and none that is in the least acquainted with Augustin's Writings can say it ever was his meaning to deny the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain to be any wise Concerned in the Christian Faith for Augustine was a most zealous Asserter of the Necessity of Faith in Christ as he came in that Body in order to our Salvation against the Heresie of Pelagius who denied it and Writ many Books against that Heresie now Revived by many of the Quakers Teachers tho what R.B. hath Writ here I impute to his Inadvertency and do not charge him with the Pelagian Heresie for the same because from other Places of his Writings I can prove that he made the Faith of Christ's giving his Body to be Slain for us necessary to our Salvation and a part of the Christian Belief SECT II. AND as Inadvertent and Mistaken as R.B. was in his Quotation of Augustine concerning Christ's Flesh and Blood no less hath W. Penn been p. 314. of his Rejoynder to J. F. in his Quotation of Bishop Jewel in his Sermon upon Jos 6.1 2 3. Who speaking of what Christ was to the Jews in the Wilderness says thus Christ had not yet taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did eat his Body he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood St. Paul saith all did eat the same Spiritual Meat that is the Body of Christ all did drink of the same Spiritual Drink that is the Blood of Christ and that as truly as we do now And whosoever did then so Eat lived for ever I think saith W. Penn a Pregnant and Apt Testimony to Christ's being the Christ of God before his coming in the Flesh Ans But this doth not prove that by Christ here B. Jewel meant only the Light within in these Jews and by his Body and Blood only that Light within or Seed or Principle as W. Penn would have it All that are in the least acquainted with the Doctrine of the Church of England of which B. Jewel was a Zealous Defender as in his Apologie for the same appeareth or with B. Jewel's Writings know well that the Sense which W. Penn hath here put on B. Jewel's Words never came into his Remotest Thoughts but it is no wonder that he should so misunderstand and misconstrue B. Jewel's Words when he doth so use the Scriptures themselves B. Jewel's Sense is Obvious Christ had not taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did Eat his Body viz. by Faith believing that in the time appointed of God he would take a Body and give up that Body to be Slain for their Sins he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood viz. By faith believing that after he should take flesh and blood in the fulness of time he would give his blood to be shed for the remission of their sins and by this faith all the faithful among them had Christ dwelling in them by his spirit and did know and witness his spirit to regenerate and sanctifie them to quicken and refresh them and nourish them as meat and drink doth refresh and nourish the body of man As for his Quotations out of Joshua Sprig and others its no wonder he doth so Magnifie them seeing its but too evident the Quakers have sucked that Poisonous Milk out of the Breasts of such Men who have been in the same Errors before them But to return to R.B. his Arguments whereby he laboureth but to no purpose to prove that the Flesh there mentioned John 6.53 c. hath no Relation to his outward Flesh First saith he p. 63 because that it is said both that it came down from Heaven yea that it is he that came down from Heaven Now all Christians at present generally acknowledge that the outward Body of Christ came not down from Heaven neither was it that part of Christ which came down from Heaven Ans 1. By Himself that came down from Heaven who is called by Paul the second Adam the Lord from Heaven Heavenly the quickning Spirit cannot be meant the inward Principle of Light in Men abstractly considered from the Fountain of it which dwelt in the Man Christ but chiefly the Light as in him and consequentially that which Men receive out of his Fulness according to their several Measures And as our Regeneration and Salvation have a necessary Dependance on that fulness of Light Life and Grace that dwells in him out of which we receive our several Measures so they have a necessary respect to the Man Christ both Soul and Body in which that Fulness dwelleth because the Soul and Body of Christ even his outward and visible Body was concerned in that great Work of our Redemption in what he did and Suffered for us Therefore God hath Exalted the same Man Jesus Christ both in Soul and Body in Unity with his Godhead to be a Prince and Saviour to give Repentance and Remission of Sin Grace and Glory and all Spiritual Blessings to all that shall be saved This ancient Writers have explained by the Example of a red hot Iron exceedingly burning and shining the Fire and Light in the same answering to the Godhead and the Iron answering to the Manhood Now when this fired Iron burns or lightens any Stick of Wood that is applied to it it is not the Fire only without the Iron nor the Iron only without the Fire but both joyntly that have an Operation upon the Wood to Kindle and Lighten it even so it is the Godhead of Christ in Unity with his Manhood consisting of Soul and Body that wrought that outward Redemption for us and doth inwardly produce in us the blessed Effects of it by his Spirit in Renewing and Sanctifying us Justifying us and giving us Eternal Life and Glory Ans 2. Because Christ's outward Body of Flesh was Miraculously Conceived by the Power of the most High and in that respect had a Heavenly Original as well as that it was really the Woman's Seed and part of the Virgins Substance therefore it may be said to be from Heaven and to be Heavenly as well as Earthly as Wheat and Barly and other Grains that Grow in America which come Originally from England are called English Grain even in America though they are also American
Grain being produced out of the Soil of American Earth Secondly saith he p. 63. and to put the Matter out of doubt when the Carnal Jews would have been so understanding it he tells them plainly v. 63. It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profits nothing Ans Nor doth this prove his Assertion the Error of the Carnal Jews was that they supposed Christ meant they were to eat his Body Corporally with their Bodily Mouth but if they had understood that he meant not a Corporal Eating but a Spiritual and Metaphorical they had not erred in so thinking his Quotation approved by him out of Augustine proves that by eating here Christ meant believing in him as he was to Dye for the Sins of the World and as he was to give his Body to be broken for them and his Blood to be shed for the Remission of the Sins of all that should believe in him and for the giving Eternal Life to them both in Soul and Body Thirdly Saith he p. 63.64 This is also founded upon most sound and solid Reason because that it is the Soul not the Body that is to be Nourished by this Flesh and Blood now outward Flesh cannot Nourish nor Feed the Soul there is no Proportion nor Analogy betwixt them neither is the Communion of the Saints with God by a Conjunction and mutual Participation of Flesh but of the Spirit he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit not one Flesh for the Flesh I mean outward Flesh even such as was that wherein Christ lived and walked when upon Earth and not Flesh when transposed by a Metaphor to be understood Spiritually can only partake of Flesh as Spirit of Spirit as the Body cannot Feed upon Spirit neither can the Spirit Feed upon Flesh Ans Here also he Argueth very Weakly and Fallaciously that which deceived him and occasioned his great Mistake which he embraced as a solid Reason was by Arguing from the strict literal Sense of Nourishing and Feeding to the Metaphorical and Figurative which all true Logicians and Masters of solid Reason will say is unlawful as also to Argue from the natural Feeding or Nourishing to the Spiritual To his Argument then I answer outward Flesh cannot Feed the Soul Naturally I grant Spiritually and Metaphorically I deny now the Eating Feeding and Nourishing meant John 6.53 is not Natural but Spiritual and Metaphorical the Word Eating signifieth Believing And whereas he speaketh of the Feeding of the Spirit or Soul of Man that it cannot be the Flesh of Christ that can Feed it but the Spirit so as to be its Food by Food here we must understand it Metaphorically even as R.B. hath confessed that the Spirit of Christ is not properly but Metaphorically called Flesh So the Souls of Believers Feeding upon the Spirit of Christ is also Metaphorical for if by the Spirit of Christ he meant the Godhead how can the Godhead which is an Infinite Being in all respects be the Food f the Soul or Spirit of Man that is Finite strictly or literally understood without a Metaphor much more may I use his Argument against his own Assertion there is less Proportion or Analogie betwixt the Infinite Creator and the Soul that is a Finite Creature than is betwixt the Flesh of Christ and the Soul Besides if we argue from the strict and literal Nicety of the Words Food Feed and Nourishment that which is the Food and Nourishment of a Body becomes a part of its very Substance and Being shall any therefore conclude that because God is the Food and Nourishment of the Souls of the Saints that therefore he becomes a part of their Souls We know George Fox was blamed for saying the Soul was a part of God or of the Divine Essence surely it is as justly blame-worthy for any to say that God is a part of the Soul therefore when God or his Spirit is said to be the Souls Food it is not to be understood Strictly and Literally but Metaphorically and Figuratively as when David saith my Soul thirsteth after God But if it be said that not the Godhead but that which R.B. calleth the Vehicle of the Godhead is the most proper and immediate Food of the Souls of Believers as a certain Divine Emanation or Efflux nor can that Strictly and Literally without a Metaphor be called the Souls Food for that Divine Emanation or Efflux doth not become any part of the Souls Substance but is more Noble than the Soul of any Saint upon the Hypothesis that there is such a thing which to dispute is forrain to the present Question for the Soul of Man in its own Nature is capable of Sin and sinful Defilements which this Divine Seed or Principle in the Soul is not therefore it can never be Convertible into the Souls Substance The Feeding of the Soul therefore in whatever Sense we take it is Metaphorical and not to be measured or determined by the Feeding of the Body yet beareth some Analogy or Similitude thereunto as all Metaphors do to the things from which they are transferred for as what Feeds the Body doth Refresh and Comfort it maketh it Lively and Vigorous Fat and Beautiful and doth strengthen it and is united with it So the Spirit of Christ and his Divine Influences in the Souls of Believers have the like Effects in them they do wonderfully Refresh and Comfort them and that most sensibly make them Lively and Vigorous Fat and Beautiful and do mightily strengthen them and make them Fruitful in Divine Virtues and Fruits and are United with the Soul SECT III. BUT there are two other things that need Correction in these foregoing Words of R.B. the first is that he saith it is the Soul not the Body that is to be Nourished by this Flesh and Blood this is a great Mistake though the Bodies of the Saints are not to be Nourished by Christ as with natural Food that is Corruptible yet seeing it is by him that the Bodies of the Saints shall be raised up at the Resurrection of the Dead to partake of Life Everlasting therefore he is truly said to be that Food that Perisheth not that Feedeth both the Souls and Bodies of the Saints to Life Everlasting and though their Bodies Dye yet because by the Power of Christ's Resurrection as his Body was Raised from the Dead so on the account of his Resurrection their Bodies shall be Raised to Eternal Life Therefore their Bodies as well as their Souls are truly said to be Nourished by him The second is that he saith neither is the Communion of the Saints with God by a Conjunction and mutual Participation of Flesh but of the Spirit he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit not one Flesh Ans The Communion indeed of the Saints with God is not by any natural Conjunction or Union of Christ's Body that was outwardly Slain with the Saints yet a Mystical and Relative Union there is as really or rather more really as
Protestants in tying this Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ to that Ceremony used by him with his Disciples in the breaking of Bread c. As if it had only a Relation thereto or were only enjoyed in the use of that Ceremony which it neither hath nor is Ans For any to tye the Participation of Christs Body and Blood to the outward Eating in the Supper as above mentioned is indeed a great Error But it was a great Mistake in him and too rashly charged in general by him upon both Papists and Protestants their being guilty of that Error For it can be shewn that some of the Popish Writers have affirmed the contrary and delivered it as the common Faith of their Church that true Believers partake of Christ's Flesh and Blood although they Dye before they receive the outward Supper for which Lombard Lib. 4. Dist 9. citeth Augustine saying Lib. de med paen Nulli ambigendum est c. No man ought to doubt that any Man is then a partaker of the Body and Blood of the Lord when he is made a Member of Christ nor is he Alienated from the Communion of that Bread and Cup although before he Eat that Bread and Drink the Cup being Constituted in the Unity of the Body of Christ he depart out of this World for he is not deprived of the benefit of that Sacrament when he is found to have that which that Sacrament signifieth And as for the generality of Protestants I know not nor ever knew any that so tyed the Participation of Christs Body to the outward Supper as he mentioneth They say indeed it is a Means of Grace and of our Communion of the Lord's Body but not the only means or so absolutely necessary as without it none have that Communion Another great Mistake I find in R.B. p. 81. of that Treatise where he saith as for the Paschal Lamb the whole end of it is signified particularly Exod. 13.8.9 to wit that the Jews might thereby be kept in remembrance of their Deliverance out of Egypt Ans That is indeed mentioned as an end of it but not the whole end of it for the end of the whole Law was Christ whereof that Command of the Passover was a part but that the Passover was a Type of Christ particularly as he was to be Slain for their Sins is plain out of Paul's Words 1. Cor. 5.7 Let us keep the feast c. for our passover is slain for us Now as the Jews were to Eat the Flesh of the Passover so the Believers in Christ are to Eat his Flesh even that Flesh that was Slain to wit by Faith as is above declared but not by any Corporal Eating and why did John the Evangelist apply these Words of the Passover to Christ's Body a bone of him shall not be broken This plainly proveth that the Passover was a Type of Christ and therefore one great end of it was to hold him forth to their Faith In p. 87. R.B. saith let it be observed that the very express and particular use of it according to the Apostle is to shew forth the Lord's Death c. But to shew forth the Lord's Death and partake of the Flesh and Blood of Christ are different things from whence he infers as his following Words shew that this Practice of the outward Supper hath no inward or immediate Relation to Believers Communicating or Partaking of the Spiritual Body and Blood of Christ or that Spiritual Supper spoken of Rev. 3.20 Ans This Consequence doth not follow that Practice of the outward Supper had not only that end to Commemorate and shew forth the Lord's Death but had other great ends also as another was to signifie their Communion of Christ's Body as not a bare Sign but as a means of that Communion though not the only means or such a means as if the said Communion were tyed thereto another end was to signifie their Union and Communion one with another both which ends are plainly held forth in these Words The bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Lord's Body c. and we being many are one bread and all are made partakers of that one bread And though R.B. denyeth that by Bread in those Words the bread which we break is it not the communion of the Lord's body is to be understood the outward Bread yet I have above proved it to be the outward Bread that was used in the Supper for to understand it of the Lord's Body were to make it Non-sense as to say the Body of Christ is it not the Communion of his Body Whereas the true Sense is Obvious taking it for the outward Bread The Bread which we break is it not a Sign of the Communion of the Lord's Body c. And such a Sign that is a means whereby our Communion of the Lord's Body and of the Spiritual Blessings we have thereby is confirmed to us and an increase of Grace is Exhibited unto us as it is duly Administred and Received SECT V. PAge 83. He puts a very false and strained Sense upon these Words ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of Devils ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and of the table of Devils 1 Cor. 10.21 which shews saith he that he understands not here the using of Bread and Wine because those that do Drink the Cup of Devils and Eat of the Table of Devils yea the Wickedest of Men may partake of the outward Bread and the outward Wine Ans By the Lord's Table is not meant barely and simply the Signs of Bread and Wine but as they do signifie and are Means Exhibitive of the Spiritual Blessings understood thereby The Wickedest of Men may indeed receive the Bread and Wine but they are not to them any Significative or Exhibitive Signs and Means of these Spiritual Blessings which are the things signified and intended and are the Kirnel without which the bare outward Signs are mere Shells and broken Cisterns Again Let us distinguish betwixt what is de jure i.e. of Right and what is de facto i.e. in Fact Wicked Persons though in Fact they may receive the outward Part yet they have no Right to it The manner of Speech used here by Paul is like that of James doth the same fountain send forth sweet water and bitter How then can the same tongue bless God and curse men My brethren these things ought not to be And when as Paul said elsewhere no man can say Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost he may outwardly say the Words but he hath no Right to say them nor can his saying them profit him without the Holy Spirit But that by the Table of the Lord and the Cup of the Lord here are to be meant the outward things of Bread and Wine as above described is evident from the Antithesis or Opposition he makes betwixt the Table of Devils and the Table of the Lord and
betwixt the Cup of Devils and the Cup of the Lord. Now the Table of Devils and the Cup of Devils were outward things to wit the outward Offerings of Meats and Drinks that the Heathens offered to their Idols and to Devils Therefore also by the Table of the Lord and the Cup of the Lord were meant the outward things of Bread and Wine not barely and simply as such but as Signifying and Exhibiting the Spiritual Things above-mentioned His Arguing against this Institution from the one Bread is answered above Part 1. Sect. 5. Page 87. and 89. He gives a most jejune and strained as well as false Sense upon these Words the Table of the Lord as saith he p. 89. he that esteemeth a Day and placeth Conscience in keeping it was to regard it to the Lord and so it was to him in so far as he was to Dedicate it unto the Lord the Lord's Day he was to do it worthily Ans We find no Day called the Lord's Day upon any such account nor did Paul call the Cup in the Supper the Cup of the Lord on any such Supposition of Men's esteeming it to be commanded when it was not really commanded but it is plainly apparent Paul call'd it the Cup of the Lord because he commanded it as the House of the Lord the Law of the Lord c. and the Command is extant drink ye all of it Matth. 26.26 27. Besides in this he palpably runs into a contradiction to what he had said a little before in p. 83. For there he will not have the Bread and Wine to be the Table of the Lord and Cup of the Lord because wicked Men cannot partake of the Table of the Lord and yet now here he grants they may and thereby Eat and Drink Damnation And as jejune and strained as well as false is the Gloss he puts on these Words he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh his own damnation and is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord as if they signified no more than what these Words import Rom. 14.23 He that doubteth is damned if he eat because he eateth not of faith which had only a Relation to Meats that might lawfully be Eaten but if he that did Eat them did think them forbidden he Sinned and so was Condemn'd in his own Conscience For the Word Damned and Damnation in both places do not signifie any Final Sentence of Damnation but only both being Sins they incurr'd the Guilt of Judgment or Condemnation But doth it therefore follow that the Sin and Guilt is the same in both Cases Is he as Guilty of Damnation that Eats Swines Flesh Doubting 〈◊〉 that Eats and Drinks Unworthily at the Lord's Table We read in James 3.1 of a greater Condemnation the Greek Word is the same in both places viz. James 3.1 and 1 Cor. 11.29 Seeing therefore there is a greater and lesser Damnation it will not follow as ◠B. would have it that the Eating of Meats that are lawful doubtfully is as great a Sin and deserves the same Condemnation that unworthy Eating at the Lord's Table One might argue after the like manner that to make a Lye about a Trifle brings as great Guilt and Condemnation as downright Atheism and denying the Lord that bought us Page 91. We find saith R.B. this Ceremony only mentioned in Scripture in four places to wit Matthew Mark and Luke and by Paul to the Corinthians Matthew and Mark give only an account of the Matter of Fact without any Precept to do so afterwards simply declaring that Jesus at that time did desire them to Eat of the Bread and Drink of the Cap to which Luke adds these Words do this in remembrance of me Ans That he calleth it a Ceremony I know no Warrant he hath the Scripture giveth it no such Name they blame the use of the Word Sacrament because it is not a Scripture Word but to be sure Ceremony is no Scripture Word they who are well Skilled in the Greek Language say that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is well enough Translated Sacrament as the vulgar Latin Translates it in that place hoc est magnum Sacramentum They further say there ought to be no prejudice against it because some Heathen Authors had formerly used it for so had they used the Word Mystery and had applied the same to the External Rites and Symbols used by them in their Sacrifices to their Idols When Paul would have himself and other Ministers of Christ to be accounted Stewards of the Mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4.1 They plead that by the Mysteries of God there are to be meant not only the Doctrins of the Christian Faith but the Observation of those Institutions of Christ of Baptism and the Supper which none will deny who believe them to be his Institutions But that he saith Matthew and Mark give only an account of the Matter of Fact without any Precept to do so afterwards Ans Though the Precept is not expressed it is implyed and Luke doth express it plainly intimating they were commanded to do it afterwards And if it were no where to be found but in Luke seeing it is acknowledged that Luke is of the same Authority with the other Evangelists it is sufficient as well as that one place in John 6. concerning the Eating Christ's Flesh and Drinking his Blood that is only expressive of that Mysterie is sufficient to prove the Truth of it Page 92. Now this Act saith he was no singular thing neither any solemn Institution of a Gospel Ordinance because it was a constant Custom among the Jews as Paulus Ricius observes at length in his Celestial Agriculture that when they did Eat the Passover the Master of the Family did take Bread and bless it and breaking of it gave it to the rest and likewise taking Wine did the same c. Ans This Consequence will not follow for it is as Idle and Groundless as if one should argue the Jews in the Time of the Law had their Religious Meetings where Preaching and Prayer were used therefore Religious Meetings and Preaching and Prayer are no Gospel Institutions But as his Consequence is not good so the Antecedent is not true viz. That it was no singular thing for though it was not singular in respect of the Material Part yet it was altogether singular in respect of its Formal Part. None of the Masters of the Families among the Jews said Take Eat this is Christ's Body which is to be broken for you and this Cup is the New Testament in his Blood c. It was the great Love and Wisdom of Christ to establish his Institutions under the Gospel relating to the external part of Religion as near to the Jewish Forms as possible excepting what might seem to favour their Superstitions and other Shadowy Things that were to be Abolished All the moral Part as well as divers things of Instituted Worship that were among the Jews being commanded
their being Members of the Jewish Church and their Eating of the Passover and of the Sacrifices such as were allowed to them to Eat was a Sign of their being still owned as such and if any by their offensiveness and disobedience did occasion the Church to debarr them from the external Privileges of that Church when upon their Repentance and Reconciliation they were again received they needed no second Circumcision so nor do professed Christians having committed any thing that occasion their casting out being again received by Repentance need a second Baptism Now if Baptism had been the alone obsignating token of the Covenant and Badge of Christian Communion how should Persons be received into Communion without a new Baptism but to have a new Baptism is as improper as for a Woman after some just offence against her Husband that he has put her from him if upon her Repentance he receive her again to need a second Marriage with the same Husband but tho' she need no second Marriage yet that her Husband give her some token and pledge of his Favour and Acceptance is very suitable And now seeing these external Practices have so many necessary uses in the Church so that the Church cannot in all respects be duly constituted and have all things in order without them it is evident that as long as the Church was to continue on Earth in its due Constitution so long should these external Practices remain and seeing Christ enjoyned this of breaking Bread to remain to his coming it is evident that it is his last outward coming The Fifth Reason is that Christ's Inward coming was then in and among the Disciples when he did Institute these Outward Practices The Church was never without the Inward Presence of Christ and of God and of the Holy Spirit It is true that Christ promised his Inward Presence to be with them and in them but this was not so to be understood as if the Faithful had him not present formerly in all Ages as well before as after his Outward coming for without the Inward Presence of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit there can be no true Faith nor Holiness We find that the Faithful are called Saints as well in the Old Testament as in the New and therefore they had as true Inward enjoyments of God then as since the difference at most is but in degree betwixt the Divine Enjoyments of the Faithful before Christ came in the Flesh and since as to the general And if it be said that though Christ was Inwardly come to some yet not to all in the Apostles times so as to Answer to the full extent of the fulfilling of the Promise of his Inward coming It may be answered nor is he so come now for as Christ said the Poor ye have always with you so until the end of the World there will be in the Church Babes and little Children as well as young Men and Fathers and therefore on the account of such by R. B.'s Confession that are weak as some of the Corinthians were that needed those Outward things to put them in Remembrance of Christ's Death they are still to be continued even to Christ's last Outward coming but there are too many among the Quakers that think there is no need to Remember Christ's Death as he dyed at Jerusalem abusing and perverting Paul's words henceforth we know Christ no more after the flesh and so there is no need or use of Remembring Christ's Death that they say is but History but Christ within is the Mystery whereas Christ within is not the whole Mystery but in part and the lesser part too the whole Mystery of Christ is Christ both Outwardly come in the Flesh and Inwardly come by his Spirit into the Hearts of the Faithful The Sixth Reason is that to understand by the coming of Christ in these words untill he come 1 Cor. 11. His Inward coming and not his coming Without us at the day of Judgment by the same pretext and method of Interpretation All the other Scriptures every where that mention his coming throughout the whole Bible and especially throughout the New Testament shall be understood only of his Inward coming And thus we shall have not one proof left us in all the Bible to prove that there is any other coming of Christ to be expected than his Inward coming in Mens Hearts And accordingly indeed we find that too many of the Quakers have by this manner of perverting this place of Scripture been led to understand all these other places of Scripture in the New Testament that mention his coming since he came in the Flesh to be only understood of his Inward coming in Mens Hearts and on this account have denyed any other coming of Christ to be expected but only his Inward coming being persuaded into this False and Antichristian Belief by some of their great Teachers witness what William Baily a great Teacher among them hath plainly declared in this matter p. 306. of the Collection published by the 2d days Meeting of the People called Quakers at Grace-Church-street I never read in all the Scripture saith he as I can remember of a 3 d. coming of Christ personally in his own single person or of a personal Reign besides what shall be in his Saints But I have read of his coming the 2 d. time without Sin unto Salvation c. which the Apostles in their days did witness Witness also Rich. Hubberthorn another great Teacher in his Collection published after his death also by the 2d days Meeting p. 56. in answer to his Opponent How many Souls hast thou led into that Pit of Darkness and Blindness as to believe that Christ is yet to come in Person Now the Scripture which thou bringest proves no such thing Matth. 24.27 And a 3d. witness is G. Whitehead in his Nature of Christianity against R. Gordon who p. 29. saith Dost thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear Outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou dost thou may'st look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him And p. 41. Where doth the Scripture say he is Outwardly and Bodily Glorified at God's right Hand Do these words express the Glory he had with the Father before the World began in which he is now Glorified This and the two foregoing Quotations are to be found more large in my Two Narratives of the Proceedings at Turners-Hall all which sufficiently prove that they believed no Outward coming of Christ as a thing to come therefore it is no wonder that they meant only Christ's coming Inwardly into Mens Hearts by these words ye shew forth the Lord's death until he come for from the same Unbelief they have construed all the other places that mention Christ's coming after his Resurrection of his Inward coming and all this in prejudice of his Outward coming which these Men did not believe which
of Recommendation concerning him they both sent with him to Friends in Ireland contained in the said Manuscript unto you all saith Edward Burrough I do him recommend as a faithful Labourer to be received by you in the Name of him that sends him in tender pity for you all and the Blessing of the Lord upon his Faithfulness I doubt not c. Dated London 19. 3d. mo 1656. And saith Fr. Howgil receive Humphry Norton in the Lord whom the Lord hath moved to come unto you who is a Brother and Faithful in the Lord's Work and be Subject unto him in the Lord all unto him for I much desired that he might come unto you and so the Lord hath ordered it and as you receive him you receive me F. Howgil This Man Humphry Norton after his Arrival in Ireland in the year 1656 writ and spread about several Papers among the People call'd Baptists and others of which I have seen divers contained in a Manuscript all Writ by one Hand and having his Name to them His Argument against Baptism is in the following Words Q. 15. And now ye Baptists seeing that Christ is come and hath Baptized us and all Men come unto him tell me whether there be any Baptism but one seeing the Apostle saith one Lord one Faith one Baptism Eph. 4.5 6. And whether Baptism be not a Doctrin yea or nay If you say an Ordinance whether it be not Abolished yea or nay seeing the Scripture saith having abolished in his Flesh the Enmity even the Law of Commandments contained in Ordinances for to make in himself of Twain one new Man so making Peace Eph. 2.15 Ans That concerning one Baptism is fully Answered above To the latter concerning Ordinances the Word in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not properly Translated Ordinances but rather Opinions or Persuasions But let it be Translated Ordinances how doth this prove that therefore Water-Baptism is Abolished unless the Argument be built upon this Supposition that all Ordinances are Abolished and consequently Baptism with Water and at the same rate Preaching and Prayer must be Abolished which are no less Ordinances And in the same Parcel of Queries the fifth Querie is now Answer in plain Words From whence must this Christ ye wait for come and in what Generation and of what Family and out of what Country and of whom must he be Born that they may no longer be deceived by you who have kept them gazing after a false Christ well may it be called Gazing but leave it and mind these in white Apparel which Reproves you for it Acts 1.10 11. This Humphry Norton after some Years went into New England and after his Return Prints a Book at London which I find Quoted in another Printed Book having the like or the same Queries for Substance the Words are these Is not Christ God and is not God a Spirit you look for a Christ without you from what Coast or Country shall he come What Country-man is he You stand Gazing up in the Clouds after a Man but we stand by in White chiding of you Reader are not these dreadful Words enough to make all Christian Ears to tingle it is no wonder that they have so generally Construed these Words ye shew forth his Death until he come to be only his inward coming when the chiefest Teachers among them had no Faith of his outward coming to Judge the World And it is but too likely that E. Burrough and F. Howgil were as great Unbelievers as he in that great Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion and if they were not they were miserably deceived and did miserably deceive themselves by their supposed Gift of Discerning to give such high Recommendations and Praises of a Man that deserved not to be numbred among the lowest Rank of Christians who hath dared thus openly like one of the Heathen Opposers to Scoff at our Blessed Lord's coming without us to Judgment but never any Christian gave him occasion for such a Scoffing manner of Questioning it being universally believed by all Christians that our Lord will come from Heaven in the same Body wherein he Ascended and is not to be Born again of a Woman Again In another Paper that hath his Name to it there are these Words and whereas he Accused us for denying Christ's Merits I say that which can be Merited is of Self and that which is of Christ is freely given But such a word is not in Scripture as Christ's Merits but is fetch'd from the Whore a at Rome by them Behold the Man whom E. Burrough's called a Faithful Labourer and F. Howgil called a Brother Faithful in the Lord's Work to whom he would have all the Quakers in Ireland to be Subject How can they who follow such blind Guides but fall into the Ditch with them Is there any greater or so great Blindness to be found in the Blindest and most Ignorant of the Papists In a Book of mine called Truth 's Defence p. 140. I find an other Argument I have used against the Supper the Effect of which is contained in these following Words What Christ did at that time and bid his Disciples do until he come is no Gospel Ordinance because it was done in the Night or Evening of the old Covenant Dispensation and consequently was to come to an end with it Ans. I freely acknowledge this Argument is Weak and Unsound and the way to Answer it is by denying the Consequence to be True and Just for mostly what Christ Taught was in the Evening or latter part of the old Covenant but it doth not therefore follow that it was to end with it As also where I have said in my Book called Presbyterian and Independent Churches c. P. 185. That which ye now use is neither Substantial Dinner nor Supper being only a Crumb of Bread c. I acknowledge was unadvisedly said and as weakly Argued for the end of that outward Institution was not any outward Substantial Dinner or Supper as neither was that of the Paschal Lamb. And also where p. 184. of the same I have argued that the use of the outward Signs of Baptism and the Supper did suit most with the Ages and State of Children for they suit well enough with the most grown Christians while remaining in the Mortal Body SECT XII AND thus I have Answered to all the Arguments brought against the outward Baptism and the Supper by their several Writers and chief Teachers that I have found in their Books not omitting any to my best Remembrance of any Note where though I have brought in G. Fox among the last because I had not found the particular Book where his Arguments were until I had finished my Answer to the other four preceeding yet he was the first among the Quakers that led them as into divers other great Errors so into this of rejecting the outward Baptism and the Supper grounding all upon a pretended Divine Inspiration and as
that Christ was to offer up himself in no other Body but that which was without all Sin 7. Why was it Prophecied of Christ a Body hast thou prepared me why not Bodies many if he offer up himself in the Bodies of all the Saints 8. Is not this to make the Sacrifice of Christ of less Value and Efficacie in his own Body than his Sacrifice in W. Penn's Body because the Sacrifice of Christ in that Body that was offered at Jerusalem was the Type this in W. Penn's Body the Anti-type That the History This the Mystery 9. Doth not this strengthen the Papists in their false Faith that Christ is daily offered in the Mass an unbloody Sacrifice I desire that W. Penn and G. Whitehead will give a positive Answer to these Queries and shew wherein my Arguments against their Notion of Christ's being offered a Sacrifice in Men are not so strong against them as W. Penn's Arguments are against the Papist's Notion that Christ is offered up daily in the Mass I. Note Reader Whereas my Adversaries Tho. Elwood and J. Pennington in their Books against me have brought several Quotations out of some of my former Books particularly The Way cast up p. 99. and The Way to the City of God p. 125. on purpose to prove that I was of the same Mind and Persuasion with W. Penn and George Whitehead concerning Christ being a real Sacrifice for Sin in Men to Appease the Wrath and Justice of God and his being the Seed of the Woman in them having Flesh and Blood c. to be understood without any Metaphor or Allegory or other Figurative Speech is what I altogether deny can be inferred from my Words for as I have shewed in my Book of Immed Revel p. 14.15 16. which John Pennington hath perversly applyed in his Book called The Figg-Leaf Covering p. 5.4 The Spiritual Discerning of the Saints in Scripture is held forth under the Names of all the five Senses In like manner the things of God themselves are held forth in Scripture under the Names of sensible things and which are most Taking Pleasant and Refreshing unto the Senses as Light Fire Water Oyl Wine Oyntment Honey Marrow and Fatness Bread Manna and many other such like Names which I expresly grant are Metaphors yet that hinders not said I but that the Spiritual Mysteries Represented under them and signified by them are real and substantial things to wit God's Power and Virtue Spirit Light and Life and the wondrous sweet and precious Workings and Influences thereof which I expresly mention p. 14. and indeed these outward things are but Figures of the Inward and Spiritual which as far exceed and transcend them in Life Glory Beauty and Excellency as a living Body doth the Shadow Now all this I still firmly hold and believe as much as formerly when I Writ those Words for indeed because we have not proper Words whereby to signifie Spiritual and Divine Enjoyments and Refreshments in the Souls of the Faithful therefore Words are borrowed and transferred from their common Signification to a Metaphorical and Allegorical whereby to signifie the Spiritual Enjoyments and Refreshments of the Saints from what they Witness and Experience of the Power Vertue Light Life and Love of God and Christ in them So that I still say the outward Light of Sun Moon Star or Candle is but a Shadow or Figure campared with the Divine Light of God and Christ within the outward Bread Wine Flesh though ever so excellent that the outward Man tasts of is but a Figure and Shadow being compared with that inward Bread of Life inward Wine and Flesh Oyl and Honey that is inwardly tasted and received by the inward Man But behold the wretched perversion that my Prejudiced Adversary John Pennington puts upon my sound Words and the wretched Conclusion that he draws from thence as if therefore I did hold then that the outward Death of Christ was but a Shadow or Sign of the inward Death of Christ in Men and his outward Sacrifice and Blood outwardly Shed was but a Figure and Shadow of his being a Sacrifice within Men and his Blood inwardly Shed which as it hath no Shadow of Consequence from any Words so it never came into my Thoughts so to imagine for in that place of my Book of Immed Rev. above quoted by him I did not compare Christ's Death without and his Death within or his Blood without to his Blood within making That the Shadow and Figure and This the Substance as they do But I was comparing the outward Meats and Drinks as Bread Flesh Wine Marrow and Fatness with the Divine Enjoyments of the Saints which borrow the Names of these outward things and whereof they are but Figures and Shadows II. And when I said in some of my former Books that Christ was the Seed of the Woman that bruised the Serpents Head in the Faithful in all Ages I did not mean that Christ as he was born of the Virgin Mary was a Figure or Allegory of Christ's Birth or Formation in the Saints But on the contrary Christ inwardly Formed is the Allegory and Metaphor yet so that Christ inwardly enjoyed in the Saints is a real Divine Substantial Enjoyment and Participation of Christ his Life Grace and Virtue in measure which they receive out of the Fulness of the Glorified Man Christ Jesus in Heaven for though to Call Christ inwardly the Seed Born or Crucified is Metaphorical yet the inward Life of Christ is Real and Substantial that the Saints Enjoy and being a Measure out of the Fulness that is in the Glorified Man Christ Jesus in Heaven it is of the same Nature therewith and it is one and the same Mediatory Spirit and Life of Christ in him the Head dwelling in Fulness and in them in Measure as Paul said to every one of us is Grace given according to the Measure of the Gift of Christ And whereas he quotes me in his 55th p. saying This is the promised Seed which God promised to our Parents after the Fall and actually gave unto them even the Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Head of the Serpent But doth this prove that Christ being inwardly Formed in the Saints was more properly and without all Allegory Metaphor or Synecdoche the Seed of the Woman than as he was Born of the Virgin I say nay though he would strain my Words to this to bring me into the same Ditch with him and his Brethren who make Christ without the Type and History and Christ within the Substance and Mystery That the promised Seed was actually given to Believers immediately after the Fall hath this plain Orthodox Sense That the Power of Christ's Godhead or the Eternal Word that was in the beginning and which was in the Fulness of Time to take Flesh and Blood like unto the Children did actually break the Power of Sin and Satan in the Faithful and this Power was the real Power of the Seed of
the Woman that was Born of the Virgin Mary and what that Power effected and wrought in the Faithful in the Ages before Christ came into the Flesh it was with Respect to his coming in the Flesh and to what he was to do and suffer in his Body of Flesh for their Sins And what I said as Quoted by him page 35. out of my Book Way to the City of God page 125. Even from the beginning yea upon Man's Fall God was in Christ Reconciling the World to himself and Christ was manifest in the Holy Seed inwardly and stood in the way to ward off the Wrath of God from the Sinners and Unholy that it might not come upon them to the uttermost during the Day of their Visitation All this or what ever else of that sort I have said in any of my Books hath a safe and sound Sense rightly understood though this Prejudiced Adversary seeks by his own Perversion to turn them to the contrary The Word Reconciling Redeeming hath a two-fold Signification the one is to satisfie Divine Justice and pay the Debt of our Sins this was only done by Christ as he Suffered for us in the Flesh the other is to Operate and Work in us in order to slay the Hatred and Enmity that is in us while Unconverted that being Converted we may enjoy that inward Peace of Christ that he hath Purchased for us by his Death and Sufferings Now that the Light Word and Spirit gently Operates and Works in Men to turn and incline them to Love God to Fear him and Obey him to Believe and Trust in him that is to Reconcile Men to God and to ward or keep off the Wrath of God from them And thus God was in Christ Reconciling the World to him in all Ages But this is not by way of Satisfaction to Divine Justice for Men's Sins but by way of Application and Operation inwardly Inviting Persuading and as it were Intreating Men to be Reconciled unto God that so the Wrath of God that hangs over their Heads may not fall upon them for while God by Christ thus inwardly visits the Souls of Men inviting and persuading them to turn and live saying why will ye Dye the Wrath is suspended and delayed to be Executed upon them yet it is not removed but abides upon them until they Repent and Believe as the Scripture testifieth he that believeth not the Wrath of God abideth on him And though this inward Appearance and Operation in Christ in Men's Hearts stayeth the Execution of Divine Wrath and Justice yet that inward Appearance is not the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of Men's Reconciliation with God but the Means whereby what Christ by his Death and Sufferings hath Purchased is applyed for though Christ made Peace for us by his Blood outwardly Shed yet that Peace cannot be nor is obtained or received by any but as the Soul is inwardly Changed and Converted and so Reconciled unto God III. And the like twofold Signification hath the Word to Attone for as it signifieth to Attone or Reconcile God and us that wholly is procured by Christ's Obedience unto Death and Sacrifice that he offered up for Men on the Cross but as it signifieth the effectual Application of that great Attonement made by Christ for Men at his Death that is wrought by his Spirit and inward Appearance in their Hearts And I might well say at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to Attone and Pacify the Wrath of God towards Men as he Quotes me in my Book Way to the City p. 125. For taking Attoning in the first Sense the Virtue Merit and Efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross did as really extend to the Faithful for Remission of Sin and bringing into Reconciliation and Peace with God from Adam's Fall as it now doth which this Prejudiced Author seems wholly ignorant of as well as his Brethren Again taking it in the second Sense for the effectual Application of the Attonment made by Christ's Death through his Meek and Lamb-like Appearance by his Spirit and Life in Men's Hearts it has a Truth in it And Christ may be said to be the Lamb of God that taketh away the Sins of the World both by his outward Appearance in the Flesh as he Dyed for us to Procure and Purchase the Pardon of our Sins and our Justification before God and also by his inward Appearance to Renew and Sanctifie us for as by our Justification the Guilt of Sin is taken away so by our Sanctification is the Filth of it removed Both which is the Work of Christ the Lamb of God respecting both his outward and inward Appearance in his outward being a Sin-offering for us and a Sacrifice in a strict Sense in his inward Appearance of his Divine Life in us being as a Peace-offering and Sacrifice of sweet smelling Incense before God not to Reconcile God and us as is above said but to apply effectually to us the Reconciliation made for us by his Death on the Cross IV. And that I said as he again Quotes me the Seed hath been the same in all Ages and hath had its Sufferings under by and for the Sins of Men in them all for the Removing and Abolishing them This I still hold that there is a tender Suffering Seed or Principle in Men that suffers by Men's Sins and by its gentle Strivings prevails and gains the Victory at last in all the Heirs of Salvation But this suffering Seed or Principle I never held it to be God nor was I ever of that Mind that God did really and properly Suffer by Men's Sins although I have known divers to hold such an absurd Opinion as G. Whitehead hath plainly declared to be his Opinion in his Divinity of Christ p. 56. which is as really Repugnant both to Scripture and sound Reason as to hold that God hath Bodily Parts and Members because the Scripture in many places in condescension to our human Capacities speaks of God's Suffering Repentance being grieved as it doth of his Face Eyes Ears Hands and Feet all which ought not to be properly but Allegorically understood And though I hold that this tender Seed suffers in Men by their Sins that so by its gentle Strivings with them it may overcome them and Slay and Crucifie the Body of Sin in them Yet I hold not that Suffering to be the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of our Justification and Pardon of Sins before God nor do I remember any where that I have so said or writ if any shall shew me where I shall readily Correct and Retract it or any thing in any of my Books that looks that way And if any Query whether I hold that Seed to be Christ that doth so suffer in Men by their Sins I Answer It is not the Fulness of Christ but a Measure proceeding from the Fulness that was and is lodged in the