Papists and quâ—keâ—s about justification This is the old thread bare shâ—fâ—lle of the Papists when they are prest by the Protestants and their justification by workes or inherent holinesse is confuted by Scripture they constantly answer as Nayler doth they deny their being justified by their owne workes which flow from a Princip e oâ— their owne power but say that the workes by which they are justified are such as flow from grace or the workings of God within their soules They say that by the first Bell. de justif l. 1. c. 19 ne hominem justificare pâ—sse men cannot be justified but per opera qua ex fide Christi gratiâ fluunt homines justificari by the workes which flow from Christ All this while both Papists and Quakers allâ—â—â— justification by inherent holinesse not by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely they pretend it is not by their owne power The full confutation of which Popâ—sh and Anti-christian Doctrine we have layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee at large pag. 11. and to which Nayler according to his wonted presumptuous confidence answers nothing Position 8. That God and man cannot be wholly reconciled till he brought into the state of the first Adam and able in his owne power to stand perfect Excep 1 Nayler first excepts against this assertion that the Booke shall witnesse against us and sayes mans being able to stand in his owne power was never spoken by him nor thought by him and sayes that though the word be twice repeated to stand in Gods power yet they are not ashamed to wrest it to their owne power c. Reply 1 1. To this we answer that the Booke which he saith shall witnesse against us hath not so much as once the words to stand in Gods power though Nayler say those words are twice repeated for the quaere is in these words Whether God created Man and Woman perfect without sinne and able in his power to have stood if they had not forsaken his power and consented to the wisedome of the Serpent The nature of the power of the first Adam considered 2. From these words We considering the nature of the state of the fi st Adam to which Nayler sayes man must be brought before he be reconciled could not but gather that standing in mens owne power must be the sense of those words Our reason is plaine For That power which Adam had to stand in his state of perfection was given to him as the Prodigals portion into his owne hand but the power that the Saints now are to stand by is a power in the hand of the Lord Iesus given to him as a feoffee in trust for in this lyes the difference of the power in the sons of men in the first and second Adam our standing in the second Adam being by a power and support in the hands and dispose of the Lord Iesus by reason of which it is alone that none can plucke us out of the Fathers hands Ioh. 10. And the standing of the first Adam being by that portion of power which was intrusted in his owne hands without any promise of assistance or perseverance from God So that it is apparent that when Nayler saies Man must be brought into the state of the first Adam before he be reconciled he must meane he must be able to stand in his owne power without any engagement of support from God for thaâ— was undeniably the state of Adams power Let Nayler shew us a tittle out of Scripture where Adam had any thing of promise or assistance for his standing more then the power he had in his own hands which was his owne power 3. If yet Nayler will shuffle that this is not one of the Doctrines of the Quakers we shall further convincingly cleare it from the very words of George Fox in a Booke entituled To all that would know the way to the Kingdome pag. 10. he profanely and like a perfect Atheist scoffes at the grace of God saying thus And to you that tempt God and say Lord give us a sight of our sins c. this light within you lets you see it so you need not tempt God to give you a sight of your sins Foxes horrible â—eering at the graâ—e of God for ye know enough c. and give over tempting of God to give you a sight of your sins And to all yee that say God give us grace and we shall refraine from our sins there yee have got a tempting customary word for the free grace of God hath appeared unto all men c. Hence thou seest Fox most wretchedly asserting these two things 1. That to pray for sight of sinne and for power from sinne is a tempting of God 2. That to pray for light and power for the discovery of sinne and refraining from it are needlesse for so he saith yee need not tempt God to give you a sight of sinne and cease from saying God give us grace for the grace of God hath appeared to all men so that he plainely affirmes that all men have both a light and power also that they need not be beholding to God to give them nor to aske them of him for he addes the reason Why you need not aske it of God for you have a light within you and you know enough c. Begging of lâ—ght and power the Saints duty What a wretched Principle is this and how câ—â—trary to plaine Scripture If any man lack Wisedome let him askâ— it of God Iames 1.5 where the Apostle bids the poore creature to beg wisedome of God though Fox scoffe at it Open thaâ— my eyes that I may see Psal 119.18 Give me understanding 〈◊〉 34.31.32 Surely it is meet to be sâ—â—d unto God that which I see not teach thou me 1 Peter 5.10 where Peter prayer the God of all grace mâ—ke you pe fect stabâ— sh strengthen settle 〈◊〉 Ephes 3 14.16 for this cause I bow my kâ—eâ—s 〈◊〉 the Fathe◠〈◊〉 our Lord Iesus that he would grant you to be strengthned 〈◊〉 might by his spirit Every good and every perfect gif◠〈◊〉 downe from above from the Father of lights Iames 1. â—er 17 Now here you may see the practice of the Sain s and the wickednesse of Foxes profane jeering at the grace of God with sending men to theiâ— owne light and power in oppositiâ—â— to the grace of God and how all the lyes that Nayler chargeth on us while he denyes this Position doe fully fall upâ—â— his owne head while it is as confidenâ—ly affeâ—ted by the gâ—◠〈◊〉 Master of this Babylonish mystery The second exception is this You that say that Adam 〈◊〉 the state of innocency was under a covenant of workes make it appearâ— to all that know Adams state that you never knew it for the Law wherein is the covenant of workes was added after c. Reply Adam in innocence under a covenant of vvorkes What we have said at large about Adams being
under a covenant of workes and how much better a state the Saints are in by interest in Christ then the soule of the first Adem was the Reader way finde at large in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 12. 13. to which he hath answered nothing as his manner is but we shall further adde First Adam was under a covenant of living by doing or by obedience to the Law which is plainely a covenant of works who knowes not this In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye Gen 2.17 2. Adam was under such a Covenant as had no Mediator upon his breach of the command there was none by that Covenant to enterpose betwixt him and death which is a distinguishing consideration betwixt the two Covenants made with the first and second Adam 3. And for Naylers reason He was not under the Covenant of Workes because the Law was given after we may laugh at his ignorance Was the Law never knowne before it was written upon Tables of stone Did God make Adam a rationall creature wholly ignorant of his will Doth the ingraving of the Law in Tables of stone inferre that Adam had not the engraving of that Law upon his heart or that he was not under the command or covenant of that Law but that we have proved from those expresse words of covenant in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye We know not whether to thinke the ignorance of this man or his impudence greater in answering nothing to what we have fully layd downe against his Doctrines Position 9. That no man that commits sin or that is not perfectly holy can ever enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory Excep 1 Nayler thus excepts There is not a word to that purpose as you have set downe Reply This is strange Doth not he confesse there is this Quaere in it Whether any imperfect one shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not then how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and cleane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory yea or no this he confesseth to be his words And is there not a word as he chargeth us there to that purpose 〈◊〉 quâ—râ—es 〈◊〉 to aâ—â—â—â—â— us 2. But the Reader must know that what he there in that Booke layes downe by way of quaery must be looked upon as his positive assertions as thou wilt see by the adjoyning quaeries in the same page where challenging those that are so much offended at perfection he puts these quaeries 1. Whether any imperfect one committing sinne be the Imâ—ge of God yea or no where a man may plainely see he meanes such an one is not the Image of God 2. Whether any can witnesse the worke of Redemption compleat in them by Christ while they commit sinne where it is evident he intends the negative So in this quaere to resolve it into a proposition we appeale to his conscience or the judicious Reader that whilest he puts â—his quaere as a challenge to those that deny perfection in this life Whether any imperfect and uncleave one that lives in sinne shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and clâ—ane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory or no we dare appeale to them we say if it runne not thus by way of assertion That no uncleane or imperfect man can enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory to wash away his sins that dyes imperfect And now thou wilt see how unjustly this man rayles with open mouth as if we were the most wicked lyars in the world when the assertion is so evidently his owne and will so appeare to any that hath but halfe an eye of common understanding Excep 2 He tells us They charge me to say that no man that hath sinned can enter into the Kingdome and as though I owned a Purgatory Reply Nâ—yâ—eâ—s shuffling Hath sinned what a miserable shuffle is this and what a pittifull conscience hath this man thy owne eyes Reader will informe thee that we have not such a tittle in our Booke we charge him to say No man that doth commit sinne and is not perfectly holy can enter into the Kingdome but who chargeth him to have said that no man that hath sinned c. For charging him as if he owned a Purgatory it s like the former surely the man was put to a pinch when he falls a doubling and shuffling so apparently We say this must be his argument Either there must be a Purgatory to wash away the sinne of him that dyes imperfect or else he can never enter into the Kingdome of God It seems Nayler knowes no other way but a Purgatory to wash away his sinne that dyes imperfect But we looke upon that clause as the absurdity which Nayler thinks to run us upon if we will pleade that a man may dye imperfect and yet be saved then we must owne a Purgatory And so because he knew no other way to wash away mens sins Quakers Popery but either by perfect holinesse here or by a Purgatory we found him out a medium even the blood of the Lord Iesus which cleanseth the soule otherwise as to its personall actings very guilty from all sinne Excep 3 Against this he objects that Text 1 Iohn 1.7 Doth it say any are cleansed from sinne while they personally act sinne or the quite contrary Reply Naylers jugling vvith Scripture How falsely doth Nayler deale with the Scripture and imitate the Father of lyes when Satan tempted Christ Mat 4 6 to cast himselfe downe from the Temple he takes that of Scripture that would be thought serve his purpose and leaves out the rest as may be seene by comparing it with Psal 91.11.12 Just so deales Nayler with the Scripture and us leaving out from that Scripture that which immediately followes If we say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us which would fully have made out the mystery of perfect justification consisting with imperfect sanctification it s spoken of Saints that are actually cleansed by the blood of Christ and yet are told there is no truth in them they make God a lyar if they say we have no sinne That Text beyond exception also Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly c. he is silent unto according to his custome Position 10. No reall Saint but he that is perfect and perfectly holy in this life and doth not sinne Our severall proofes that this is their Principle are not denyed but we are reviled for manifesting this to be an errour from Scripture though he hath not answered one of the many Scriptures we gave against this Doctrine Excep 1 The first reviling is this
Christs being made manifest which are not voyd because they are not fulfilled in this world such as the putting of the Saints into the possession of his fulnesse of glory the putting of all his enemies under his feet c. so that perfection in holinesse being one of these things that are reserved for a state of glory we doe not destroy the end of Christs comming when we pleade he shall attaine this end in his owne appointed time and though the most holy here are full of many infirmities yet the day shall be when the workes of Satan shall be destroyed in them altogether in the time appointed by the Father the Quakers may as well say because the Saints are not now in glory therefore Christ hath lost his end in dying What we have said to this both in Christs satisfying for soules whereby he presents them perfect as to justification as also his destroying at death the whole body of sinne when they enter into a perfect state of glory will shew the vanity of his second plea for though we be not perfectly holy in our selves in this life yet we are perfect as to justification and compleat in him Col. 2.10 and though the Saints be not compleatly holy at present yet the day is comming when they shall even the time appointed by him that dyed for it and purposeth to present us spotlesse at his comming so that Christ loseth not the end of his comming Mat. 5.28 opened As to his third that Mat. 5.18 not one jâ—t or tittle of the Law shall passe till all be fulfilled which he brings to prove perfection in the Saints thus First It is evident that he that is there spoken of in v. 17. as fulfilling the Law is the Lord Iesus I came to fulfill it and that was solely and alone the worke of Christ both as he was the accomplishment of Prophesies in the Law or Booke of Scripture as he was the substance of all shaddowes in the Law ceremoniall and as he in Person did exactly as Mediator performe all the duties of the Law Morall that so by his obedience many might be made righteous What is this to prove perfection in the Saints because Christ fulfilled all righteousnesse 2. But the naturall and proper sense of this Text is clearely another businesse Christ is speaking here that the Law or the word of command and prophesies shall stand good and sure the word here is interpreted in the repetition of them Luke 16.17 not one jot shall fall so here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not one tittle shall passe from the Law it shall stand good and entire in it selfe Christ is not speaking as if the Law should be compleatly fulfilled and obeyed by us it shall stand in its force and authority notwithstanding that I am come yet I came not to destroy it but to continue it in its truth entirenesse and authority like that Rom. 3.31 Doe we then make voyd the Law through Faith nay we establish it And that Isay 40.48 repeated 1 Peter 1.25 the grasse withereth and the flower thereof fadeth but the Word of the Lord abideth for ever And what a non sensicall reason is this to prove that the Saints are perfect here and doe perfectly fulfill the Law because the Law shall not lose a tittle of its authority and entirenesse Rom. 8.4 opened 3. His third plea to prove the perfection of holinesse in this life is Rom. 8.4 that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us To which we answer First The Apostle here ver 1. is speaking of justification there is now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus Ver. 3. he layes downe whence that freedome from condemnation flowes and tells you that what the Law could not doe in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his owne Sonne in the likenesse of sinfull flesh for sin viz. by a sacrifice for sinne or to satisfie for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh that is when man could not be justified by reason that sinfull flesh could not satisfie the Law God sent his Sonne to satisfie for sinne that so the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us So that though we personally cannot and could not performe it yet through our union with Christ being dead with Christ Col. 2.20 quickned with him Ephes 2.5 we have his righteousnesse fulfilled in us Thou wilt fullier understand that this place is meant of the righteousnesse of Christ satisfying and fulfilling the righteousnesse of the Law and so made ours by our union with him if thou consider these observations 1. It is no where said in all the Booke of God that the righteousnesse of the Law is fulfilled in this life in any Saint as to inherent holinesse nay the contrary is here asserted ver 3. the Law was weake through Faith As also Rom. 3.20 that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law c. 2. It is Beza's note that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in us not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of us or by us 3. Is not this to goe about to confirme justification by inherent holinesse against which you have had such undenyable proofe 4. What is this but to build up the old Popish notion of justification by inherent holinesse 5. If any shall thinke that latter expression who walkes not after the flesh but after the spirit shall tye this fulfilling of the Law in us to sanctification we referre him to the first verse where the same words are used and yet they are onely layd downe as a description of the Persons to whom there is no condemnation as they are layd downe also as a description of these persons that enjoy the fruite of that glorious worke of Christ fulfilling the Law and satisfying it So that this Text onely holds forth the satisfaction of the Law by Iesus Christ to be made really ours by our union with him as fully as if it had been performed in our owne persons But as to justification by inherent holinesse or perfection of it in this life we have fully proved the contrary Lastly He tells us we looked upon it as a strange thing that Farnesworth should say No uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of Heaven When as that which we say is no such thing but a challenging of Farnsworth his ignorance of the Gospel that he can see no consistency with these two A Saint cannot be perfect here And no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of God Is this to count the Scripture a strange thing or is it not Farnsworths grosse ignorance that he knows no way of entring into glory unlesse he be perfect before he dye Is he not grossely ignorant of the maine mistery of justification by the blood of Christ May not a man be in part uncleane by reason of the imperfection of his present holines and yet pure and spotlesse too as to
give you a part of a dispute betwixt M. Sanderson a Minister of the Gospel and severall Quakers at Peirce-bridge Decemb. 12. 1653. attested by the subscriptions of ten severall persons part of which concerning the thing in question we have given you word for word Quaker Is not Christ the true light in every man speake Mr. Sand. Where Christ is he rules as a King but in all he doth not so exercise his Government Therefore c. Quaker In some he is kept under corruption and this I witnesse he is subdued in me this I pawne my salvation upon Mr. Sand. Its Blasphemy to say that a finite corruption should keep under an infinite Christ this is to make corruption stronger then Christ Quaker Well if a man obey the light within him he will be happy c. How undenyably doth this convince this man of his faithlesse and perfidious dealings in seeking most unworthily to shuffle off a Principle so fully owned by them Heb. 6.4.6 opened vindicated viz. that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption yea notwithstanding his so confident denyall of this principle yet Nayler immediately forgets himselfe and falls to proving of it in justification of Audlands Letter from Heb. 6.4 6. that its impossible to renew them againe to repentance sith they crucifie to themselves the Sonne of God afresh and put him to an open shame whence he would prove that Christ Jesus is in the reprobates because they crucifie afresh the Sonne of God 1. Let the Reader obâ—erve it is not said they crucifie the Sonne of God in themselves but to themselves How then doth this Text speake any thing to the upholding of his errour 2. Those the Apostle writes to were Hebrews the Iewes such as were of that people that crucified and put to death the Lord of life Now as it doth not follow that because they crucified him upon the Crosse therefore he was in them so neither doth it follow that Iesus Christ is in reprobates and apostates because they crucifie him afresh unto themselves This is enough to shew that though Apostates doe crucifie the Sonne of God to themselves yet it no way followes that Jesus Christ is in every man and in the reprobates is under bondage And for as much as it is affirmed that those Apostates there spoken of are included under an impossibility of salvation it must necessarily follow that if Nayler will suppose that Christ doth dwell in those then he must affirme that Christ doth dwell in those whose sins are unpardonable that have fin'd a sin against the holy Ghost Excep 3 There are yet these things objected to justifie this Principle Iohn 1.9 this is that true light that lightneth every man that cometh into the world Iohn 1.9 opened For the opening of this Scripture you are to know that Iohn is speaking here of the Eternall Word In the beginning was the Word all things were made by him c. so that his designe is to manifest the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the Creation of the world by him in which Creation he enlightneth every man that comes into the world He was in the world and the world was made by him these being the words immediately following that expression of enlightning every man c. It s cleare as can be that that light is that which was implanted in the soules in the first Creation Now that this light which in the first Creation was implanted in the soule and so is in every man that comes into the world is 1 Neither Christ 2. Nor a Knowledge of Christ as Mediator 3. Nor is a light sufficient to bring to Gospel salvation we shall fully cleare and so discover how miserably this Text is wrested by them Lâ—ght in all mâ—â—â—â—â— not Christ in all men 1. That that light there spoken of which is implanted in the soule in the first Creation is not Christ wiâ—l thus appeare First It s a light Created by Christ in the soule and so cannot be Christ himselfe unlesse they will blasphemously affirme Christ to create himselfe 2 For this light with which he enliâ—â—â—nâ—th the soule most either be by creation or by hypostaticall union viz. by the dwellingâ— of the Divinity of Christ in every man as he was personally in the humane nature when the Word was made Flesh and dwelt amongst as which how horrid a blasphemy were it to assert and how loathsome would it be to any that knowes but the first Principles of the Gospel And here we must againe tell Iames Nayler of his wicked blasphemy in affirming that Christ as Man dwells in him which though we proved against him in the Booke he pretends to answer yet he wholly passeth that over in silence without a tittle of exception which we cannot but interpret as his confession that it is his Principle Light in all gives yet no knowledge of a Meâ—iator 2. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted the soule is not a Knowledge of Christ as Mediator we shall thus evidence 1. First This was the light of the first covenant viz. a covenant of workes which did not aâ— all hold forth or make out a Mediator for it was that light which was given forth in the first creation in which Adam stood onely under a covenant of workes neither needed a Mediator before his fall upon which fall the first light of a Mediator broake out in a promise The Seed of the Woman shall breake the Serpents head as in Gen. 3 15â— ver 2. The knowledge of Christ as Mediator the Scripture parely holds forth as a matter of meer Revelation given forth by God in the second covenant and not implanted in the soule in its first creation Mat. 13.11 to you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdme of Heaven but to them it is not given If Christ doe enlighten every man in the Knowledge of himselfe as a Mediator how then comes this Scripture to speake so distinguishingly to you it is given to them it is not given which exception of Christ doth clearely deny the quakers universality that it s given to all To thiâ— is parallell that of Christ to Peter when by the Fathers peculiar revelation he understood Iesus to be Christ Mat. 16.17 Blessed art thou Simon bar Iona for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee but my Father where he cleares Peters Knowledge of Christ as Mediator not to be from any principle of light crâ—ated or naturall Knowledge but from a peculiar revelation f om the Father and pronounceth him blessed upon the account of that distinguishing discovery How fully doth that place of Paul for ever dash any pretence to a power to know Christ as a Mediator by that naturall light which is in every man that comes into the world 1 Cor. 2.14 the naturall man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnesse unto him neither can