are not all of their own works that be out of the light and the Faith that is the gift of God And are not all in their will-worships that are not in the worship that Jesus Christ the Heavenly man set up above Sixteen hundred years Since that is in the Spirit and the truth So must not every man come to the truth and to the Spirit in their own hearts if they come to the worship Jesus Christ Set up And are not your Catechisms Confession of Faith and Directories your own works and your own worship which ye have set down for People to fall down and do worship to and be Saved by And have ye not set up this since the Apostles days and since Christ set up his worship SVRVEY Because this Survey will divide it self into three Subjects and it would be too long together therefore I shall order it into three Sections The First shall Vindicat us from a Popish Salvation or justification by works or Inherent Righteousness and shall fix a Popish justification upon the Quakers The Second shall very breifly confuted their Popish justification The Third shall overturn an exception made by the Quakers against the charge of a Popish justification which we justly lay to their door SECT 1. Vindicating us from a Popish Salvation and Justification and fixing a Popish Justification upon the Quakers The great scope of this Querie is to make us seem guilty of holding a Popish Salvation by works albeit the whole Christian World knoweth what a lewd Calumny this is It having been the constant Doctrine of ours and all other Protestant Churches against the Papists that the good works of the Saints are not the causes or Meritorious procurers of their Salvation and it is founded upon Scripture-Testimony as clear as the Sun For eternal Life is none of our merit and due but is the Free gift of God Rom. 6 23. And by grace not by works we are Saved Ephēs 2 5 8 9. not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he Saveth us Tit. 3.5 And the best of our works are in this Life imperfect as is proven and so they cannot merit any good but Contrarily every defect and short coming of our Duty Merits Damnation and the Curse Deut. 27 26. Galat. 3 10. And if our good works could merit then we might trust to them which the Apostle dare not do Philip. 39 Nor is there any proportion betwixt our best works and eternal Life Rom. 8 18. And therefore they cannot merit it The whole Protestant Church hath no less always abhorred the Doctrine of justification by our own Inherent Righteousness and good works from the same clear Evidence of the Scripture for which see Rom. 3 Chap. from Vers 20. to the end and the whole Chap. following As also Galat. 2 16 21. and 3 10 11. and 5 4. Philip. 3 9. and seeing that is still imperfect in this life it can neither be the cause nor Condition of our justification before God in whose sight no man living shall be justified Psal 143 2. viz. by any Righteousness inherent or inward in himself Nevertheless albeit our inherent Righteousness and good works be not necessary to Salvation as Efficient or Meritorious causes thereof yet they are necessary indispensably thereunto by necessity of presence or as pure Antecedents without which no man is Saved excepting these that Die Immediately after Conversion and Infants from the Actual performance of good works For which see Mat. 3.10 and 5.20 and 25. from vers 34. to the end and Rom. 2.9 10. and 8.13 1 Cor. 6.9 10. Galat. 5.21 and 6.8 Heb. 12.14 And albeit our inherent or inward Righteousness be neither the Cause nor Condition of our justification before God yet it is still an inseparable Concomitant of justifying Faith For which see Rom. 8.1 9 10. 2 Cor. 5.17 Jam. 2.17.20 1 Joh. 3.3 But what if the Quakers be Guilty of a Popish justification Do not the Quakers hold justification by a Righteousness wrought within them and formally inward and inherent in themselves in this they joyn hands with the Papists in one of their most Fundamental Errors which does indeed contradict the very Design and Current of the Gospel which is to Teach us to seek Righteousness for justification in Christ and not in our selves yea and the very plain Design of Christs Death See Rom. 3.25 and 10.4 Galat. 2.16 21. and 5.4 But the Quakers endeavour to elude this our Charge pretending that they are far from holding justification by their own Inherent Righteousness with the Papists but by the alone Imputed Righteousness of Christ Thus they pretend in their Confession of Faith pag. 4.21 22. But the Quakers will not so Cheat and deceive the Christian world for first in that 21. pag. Cited where they purposely handle this Question and pretend as is now said they deny us to be justified by a Righteousness received of us by Faith calling that but an Act of the Creaturely skill and an Imputation which is an Act of mans Spirit and forging and a Fiction and Imagination in the Creaturely will and power Hence then they deny us to be justified by the Righteousness received of us by Faith and so consequently by the Imputed Righteousness of Christ seeing the Righteousness of his Obedience and Sufferings Imputed to us in Justification is not a diverse Righteousness from the Righteousness of Faith but is one and the same as is clear from Rom. 3.21 22 24 25. and 4.6 11 13 22 23 24. and 9.30 and 10.4 10. Galat. 2.16 and 3.8 and 5.5 Secondly this justification held by the Quakers must either be by the Righteousness received by Faith or else by the Righteousness of the Law and its works for there is no other third sort of Righteousness known to compet in this point but these are always stated as the only two Members of the Distinction for which see Rom. 3.28 and 4.2 3 4 5. and 9.30 31 32. and 10.3 5 6. Galat. 3.11 12. But the Quakers plainly deny the Justification held by them to be by the former yea they Scoff and Mock at that more than ever Papist did as is evident from their preceeding Language Therefore they do inevitably hold Justification by the latter wherein they manifestly joyn hands with the Papists for all their pretexts to cover it Again in the fore-Cited 22. page of their Confession they have these words and because say they we are against the latter viz. Justification by a Righteousness received by Faith whereof they were last speaking we are Clamoured upon as if we denied the Imputation of Christs Righteousness when it is only to these that are not made Righteous by it to walk as he also walked Here they hold Justification by a Righteousness Making their walk Righteous which is the plain inherent Righteousness of our Life and Conversation But the Quâkers in that last Cited pag. of their Confession go on and add that it
Isaac was born Comparing Rom. 4.10 with Gen. 17. chap. But of the Solemn Declaration thereof before the world by the clear Fruits and Evidences of one in that State and that it cannot be meant of his justification before God is sure seeing the Scriptures Cited shew very peremptorily that he was a justified man before he offered that work by which James there says he was justified And the Apostles clear Scope in the place is to hold forth that justifying Faith cannot be alone but must and will be accompanied with other graces and vertues and good works which give Lustre and Glory thereunto which there he calls the perfecting of it and without which it will be found but a dead Faith And when thirdly it is objected that men will be judged according to or by their words and works as the Scriptures often say the same answer is to be given viz. they will be judged according to or by them Declaratively as Solemn Witnesses and Testimonies of the State they are in manifesting before all the Equity of Gods procedure not as Causes or Conditions except in the Damned whose evil works are indeed the Meritorious Cause of their Misery An Appendix concerning the Merit of our good Works George Keith in his Quakerism no Popery page 55 56 57. Teaches also that the good works of the Saints are Meritorious of the Reward of happiness though not in the strictest sort of merit which he calls Condignity or deserving a Reward so as the Merit is equal in worth and dignity to the Reward yet so as to obtain viz. Meritoriously for positively he pleads for their merit here from God by promise as he out of his Infinite bounty hath seen fit to bestow viz. unto such a merit and though he refuses all Condign merit both here and likewise in the 72 page of the book as that signifies an equality betwixt the Merit and the Reward yet he still sticks though subtilly to a Condignity below an equality page 57 and in all his Arguments he still aims to prove a worth and merit in the very works themselves But I must Assert that there is no merit in any of our good or best works in any sense of merit that 's proper whatsoever to obtain from God any good thing much less the Reward of Heaven I shortly prove it Therefore first the best of our works in this life are imperfect as we have before now proved and comes far short of that which we owe Ergo they can never merit any good at the hands of God but upon the contrary the Curse and Damnation Eternally which is due to them who do not exactly in all things keep the Law of God Deut. 27.26 Galat. 3.10 Secondly Eternal Life is the Gift of God says the Apostle Rom. 6.23 therefore it is no ways merited by any good work of ours for that which a man merits is not Gifted to him but it is his due George Keith answers to this that both the Works and Merits are a free Gift and the Reward too But I rejoyn how can I merit at a mans hand by his free Gift unto me Can I merit at his hand because he hath obliged me and made me his Debtor viz. I merit from him because I owe him When I give a Beggar a Farthing then I become his Debtor and must give him another in payment of my Debt to him and then we are free and if I give him a third because now this is a free Gift again I over again become his Debtor Is not that fine Non-sense and strong Contradiction Thirdly the Apostle says Ephes 2.5.8 that by Grace we are saved and not by works Therefore our good works do not merit the Reward of Heaven in any proper signification of merit be it never so moderate and remote from strictness especially seeing the same Apostle tells us Rom. 11.6 that that which is of works cannot be of grace nor that which is of grace be of works because of a clear contradiction and the destroying of both their Natures which he their shews The Quakers then with their dear Friends the Papists must either confess Salvation not to be by any merit of our Works or else they must deny it to be by Grace flat contrary to the Scriptures George Keith's Answer that as the Reward is of Grace so the Merit is of Grace is already destroyed for I cannot merit by a free Gift of Grace seeing I can never merit by becoming a Debtor to a man for then the more I receive from him he should be the more my Debtor not I his whereas in all sense and reason I must owe him the more instead of meriting Now when George Keith yields this merit not to be equal in dignity and worth unto the Reward I cannot but commend his Modesty for its very much that the Quakers cannot merit above Adams merit if he had stood in his Obedience for nothing that he could have done all being still due to his great Sovereign could have merited properly nor could it ever have been equal to the Reward of happiness And the difference betwixt the two Covenants is not that under the first good works would have Merit Condignly not so under the Second for as to the First that is false But it lies here that under the First good works behooved to be compleatly performed as the Condition before we got or had a right unto the reward but in the Second Covenant we have right upon our first Entering into and closing of the Covenant by Faith unto the Inheritance before the performance of good works But George Keith objects there pag. 56 that the Saints are said to be worthy of the Kingdom of God and of walking with Christ in white 2 Thes 1.5 Revel 3 4 which Infers at least a suitableness Ans First their worth is not reckoned in themselves but in Christ Secondly a sutableness doth not Infer a dignity and merit A poor man in great need yea though no good man is a sutable object of an Alms though he does not merit it from us he hath no Jus personae into it Again he objects that God rewards our good works and therefore they must have some worthiness in them Ans God's rewarding so far beyond any worth that dare be pretended in our good works proves that it is not for their worth but upon some other account that we obtain the reward viz. upon Christs account in whom by his free grace we have obtained Redemption and Salvation Thirdly he objects that a meek and quiet Spirit is in the sight of God of great price 1 Pet. 3 4. Ans First our Souls also are of great price in the sight of God yet we do not for that merit Heaven Secondly doubtless God has a great esteem of vertues of one of which the Apostle here speaks in the abstract consideration from vice but in us they are mixed with Relicks of vice and imperfect and so cannot merit Thirdly
67. R COnditional redemption refuted pag. 143. External Reverence by signs and gestures warrantable vid. Courtesie and Capping Lawful and how The Righteousness whereby we are justified not inward in us pag. 181. The imputed Righteousness of Christ not inward in us ibid. The Righteousness of our good works do not merit life to us p. 186. S THe Christian Sabbath of Divine Institution pag. 104. The Christian Sabbath by whom and by what reasons proved to be changed pag. 106. Jewish Sabbaths abolish'd infer nothing against our Christian Sabbath pag. 105. The Scriptures of Divine Inspiration pag. 18. The Scriptures not a dead Letter pag. 11. The Scriptures the Word of God explained and proved pag. 12. The Scriptures pure pag. 16. The Scriptures a complete rule of Faith and Manners proved pag. 18. The Scriptures not meer Saints words proved pag. 20. The Scriptures a more sure way quoad nos then any Revelation how immediate soever explained pag. 25. The Scriptures have but one sense and no more pag. 216. The Scriptures are not every where Figurative pag. 215. Original sin in all men proved pag. 132. Original sin not the Devil pag. 131. Original sin not our punishment or temptation only but our sin also pag. 133. Swearing in due Circumstances lawful necessary religious p. 204. God not the substance of any Creature proved pag. 213. The Lords Supper of Divine Institution pag. 95. The Gospel-Supper described ibid. The Gospel-Supper not from below pag. 102. The Gospel-Supper to continue to the end of the world pag. 99. T TRuth distinguished and explained pag. 217. Christ how said to be the Truth pag. 218. W THe great Whore not our Wisdom sitting upon our will vid. the great Beast c. The Unction 1 Joh. 2.20 how said to teach all things p. 43. The title of the Word of God bereft from the Scriptures enervates their Authority and use pag. 16. The engrafted Word Jam. 1.21 how and whereof understood pag. 45. Works the condition of the first Covenant or the differencing Character of Law-righteousness pag. 183. None of our good works meritorious of Salvation pag. 186. Salvation by works denied by Protestants and how pag. 174. Rewarding of good works infers not merit proved pag. 187. Worthiness of the Saints to walk with Christ c. in Scripture-sense does not infer the merit of their works ibid. Gods esteem of the Saints vertues of meekness c. infers not their merit pag. 188. A Believers ceasing from his own works Heb. 4.10 how meant pag. 194. QUAKERS DISARM'D OR A Short Survey of some Queries lately Emitted by the Quakers where in the first place follows their Inscription INSCRIPTION Some Queries as followeth from the people called Quakers for one or all of the Ministers in Scotland to answer SVRVEY IT is indeed a Beautifying Ornament for sumptuous Buildings to have comely Frontispieces but for an empty Shop to have a rich and splendid Sign it is but small glory This Fore-runner advances with such a shew of Courage and Resolution that one would conjecture each of his Followers to be Companion to Achilles but they resembling nothing less than that which they were pretended to be it cannot but Coargue both the Arrogance and weakness of the Authors What great reason was there to have Bravado'd all the Ministers in Scotland with these Impious Queries Pray let not him that putteth on his Armour boast as he that putteth it off Do the Quakers think that all the Ministers in Scotland yea or that any of them shall be so amuzed with these Queries or puzled to answer them Nay then tell it not in Gath publish it not in Askelon lest the Daughters of the uncircumcised triumph We hope there are few Ministers in Scotland so daunted or consternat with the presumptuous bravery and windy Bravadoes of the Insolent Quakers but that if the Eagle might catch Flies they durst without Seconds undertake the cause against all the Quakers in Britain But because the Quakers are distemper'd with an high Feverish Fit of Intoxicating Delusion therefore I shall pass by the Insolence of their supercilious and haughty Inscription and proceed to their Queries which I shall not only answer but according to the brevity of my Scope shall perspicuously overthrow and refel the Heretical Positions of the Adversaries upon the several Heads therein contained to the stopping of the mouth of the reproachful Gainsayer If the Quakers then desire to be Instructed Let them not be as the Horse or as the Mule which have no understanding Psal 32.8 9. First QUERY Whether or not Grammar or Logick and the many Tongues and Languages which began in Babylon is an Infallible Rule to make a Minister of Christ and whether or not Elisha the Ploughman Amos the Herdsman Peter and John the Fishermen who could hardly read a Letter with many others who were not bred up in these things Logick and Grammar and the many Languages if they could not be Ministers of Christ Jesus yea or nay SVRVEY Very well does the Scope of this Query agree with their forenamed Book Entituled The principles of Truth wherein pag. 56. and 125. they condemn all humane Learning But the Questionist here doth either through malice or ignorance pervert the whole state of the Question for who ever heard that the Church of Scotland which here he endeavours to Slander or any other Church made humane Arts and Sciences an Infallible rule to make a Minister of Christ Then they should never have required more of any man in order to his admission to that Office but his alone sufficient skill in Grammar and Logick which the Adversaries themselves know to be most false and therefore we must hold them for malicious Slanderers The Infallible rule is set down in the first Epistle to Timothy Chapter third and to Titus Chapter first and not in Despauter or Aristotle's School Nevertheless Logick and Grammar are ordinary means of Knowledge exceedingly requisite in a Minister whose lips should preserve Knowledge Malac. 2.7 and should be apt to Teach and able to convince the gainsayers 1 Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.9 and the Quakers should have distinguished betwixt that which is requisite and useful for a Minister and that which is sufficient to make a Minister seeing a rational faculty is requisite and useful for a Minister for Beasts and irrational Creatures would be but bad Ministers me-thinks and yet a rational faculty is not sufficient to make a Minister But what just ground of Quarrel can any man have against Learning Is it not commended in Daniel Dan. 1.4.17 and in Moses Act. 7.22 may they not see the excellency of Christs Ministery held forth by a comparison with the Tongue of the Learned as an high commendation thereof Isai 50.4 and may they not see the loss and disadvantage of the want of it from Isai 29.12 14. 2 Pet. 3.16 But more particularly Grammar is an Art teaching how to Speak or Write a Language right so as it may be Sence and
though they were in us perfect yet they could not merit at Gods hands unto whom all that we can do still is our bound Duty this then will not infer moderate merit till we be perfect in such Vertues and even then our merit will be very moderate seeing all will still be due and unequal to the reward And whereas he there alledges that this our Doctrine of the imperfection and not meriting of our good works tends to the lessening of the esteem of righteousness amongst men I must tell him that this happens only amongst proud men who will not be Righteous except they can merit by it as the Pharisees who would not submit to the Righteousness of the Redeemer but would be Righteous in themselves without that whereby they lost both And I must tell him it but only keeps us humble in the esteem of our own Righteousness that we overvalue not that And I must tell him it makes us Diligent to look after more than our present reach is and not to rest in our measures attained And I am sure theirs loses these advantages of humility and diligence which are great and profitable duties and of forcing men out of themselves to Christ for Refuge and Righteousness which are the weighty intents of Law and Gospel These things may declare which of our principles here is best and according to Truth and Godliness But I make hast Studying all the brevity I can without answering every one of their Calumnies though loath to omit any of their objections in a Succinct and brief method which still I Study being loath to burden the Reader with any needless discourse SECT III. An Examination of one Exception more made by the Quakers against our Charge of a Popish justification The Quakers albeit they expresly and positively teach Justification by an inward Righteousness inherent and wrought within them as is now abundantly shewed yet they deny in their Confession pag. 4.21 22. that they hold a Popish justification but that they hold justification by the alone Imputed Righteousness of Christ and complain that they are Clamoured upon as if they denyed the Imputation of Christs Righteousness And so according to this their Doctrine the Imputed Righteousness of Christ is Inherently and Inwardly wrought in the justified And so they hope to be Vindicated from their Popish justification by adding thereunto an uncurable Contradiction in Nature and Reason Which that I may shew I shall premise First That the Imputed Righteousness of Christ consists in his Death and Sufferings for us I do not exclude his active obedience though I mention only these as above all exception as is most manifest from these Scriptures Isai 53.5 6 8 11 12. Matth. 26.28 Rom. 3.24 25 and 5 9 10. and 8 33 34. Galat. 3.13 Ephes 1.7 2 Cor. 5.21 Heb. 9.26 28. and 10 22. 1 Pet. 2.24 Isai 42.21 Secondly I must premise that if the imputed Righteousness of the Redeemer thus manifestly consisting in his Death and Sufferings for us by which Imputed we are Justified Reconciled Delivered from the Curse be really inward and formally Inherent in the Justified then so necessarily must his Death and Passion have been or else the same very thing shall be formally inward where the very self same thing was never formally inward viz. Christs imputed Righteousness shall be formally inward in the Justified where his Death and Passion wherein that Righteousness consists was never formally inward which involves a strong Contradiction Thirdly I premise that if the Death and Passion of Christ hath been formally inward in all that have hitherto been justified as is now clearly inferred by the force of our proceeding Reasons from this Distracted exception of the Quakers then Christ hath formally Died and been Crucified in them all I speak not here of Christ mystical but of Christ in his own Person as is plain Seeing the Death and Passion of Christ cannot formally fall out or happen to be except where Christ formally Dies and suffers as is Evident and the contrary involves a plain Contradiction Hence from this wild exception of the Quakers this Conclusion most manifestly follows viz. that Christ hath Died and been Crucified in all that have hitherto been Justified from which Conclusion I Argue First beside that thus Christ behooved to have Died often since the World began contrary to Heb. 9.25 26 28. and 10 12 14. That if Christ hath Died and been Crucified in all that have hitherto been Justified then his Human Body behooved to have been locally present in each of theirs and so Penetrated with each of theirs for the same Room contains a man when Justified as before seeing no man can formally and truly Die or have his Soul separated from his Body in the place where his Body is not formally present but where it is But the consequent is a strong repugnancy an utter Contradiction for so the penetration of Bodies is asserted which is utterly repugnant and let the Quakers with Papists consider if the whole great Fabrick of the World may be contained in one small Nut-shel for the penetration of all Bodies and of the all integral parts thereof is as easie as the penetration of any two of them seeing their quantitative matter and Nature from which the repugnancy of their penetration arises is all of the same kind Secondly I argue that if Christ hath formally Died und been Crucified in all that have hitherto been Justified then Christ in his manhood behooved to have been formally inward in them all seeing men cannot Die except where they are or were antecedently immediately present as can never be contradicted But the consequent involves here also a most horrid Contradiction seeing so Christs manhood shall have been often since his Ascension multiplyed unto the diverse and distant places of the Earth where the Justified lived being at the same time and to the end of the World Substantially and Formally contained also in Heaven Act. 3.21 Heb. 8.4 and 10 12 13. Colos 3.1 And if Christs Individual manhood can by any possibility be so multiplyed unto diverse and distant places at once then so may the Individual manhood of any man seeing Christs manhood is of the same essential Nature and Kind with the manhood of every man Acte 2.30 Rom. 1.3 Gal. 4.4 Heb. 2.14 16 17. And so one and the same man shall be capable to be multiplyed so as to be at London and Jerusalem both at once yea in all places and corners of the Earth at once seeing his multiplication to all of them is as possible as to any two of them But these things are utterly repugnant and blind Popish fictions for then one and the same man might in the same Instant of time be both exceedingly warm and yet extreamly cold both wounded and not wounded dead and yet not dead blind and yet not blind hang'd and yet not hang'd For it would be a strange fire that warming the man at London would also reach him at Jerusalem where
exempting But the Quakers object that all worshipping of Creatures is Idolatry but all external Reverencing of Creatures with bowing c. is a Worshipping of them Ergo c. Ans But why shall external Civil Reverence be Idolatry and not the internal also which the Quakers have often said to me they own and practise Is it only the Body that is capable of Idolatry Or is not the Soul as much capable of it Why then do they condemn or allow the one more than the other half an eye may see the Inconsistency and confusion of these Principles Ans Secondly that all worshipping of Creatures with Religious worship is indeed Idolatry Exod. 20.5 Mat. 4.10 But worshipping of Creatures with a Civil worship is not so but on the contrary God commands and approves it Exod. 20.12 Levit. 19.32 Luk. 14.10 and will they say that Abraham committed Idolatry when he bowed to the Children of Heth Gen. 23.7 or that Jacob committed Idolatry when he bowed himself to the ground seven times to his Brother and that immediately after such a manifestation of God to him Gen. 33.3 or did Solomon commit Idolatry when he bowed himself to his Mother 1 King 2.19 Solomon was no Idolater at that time me-thinks Again the Quakers alledge that Christ condemns all Honouring of Creatures Joh. 5.44 where he says how can ye believe who receive honor one of another and seek not the honour that cometh from God only Ans Hereby they Impugn the very letter of the Fifth Commandment and declare that in their Opinion no manner of Civil Reverence or regard is to be given to any man Secondly if Christ here condemns all Civil honoring of men then he condemns that same Duty here which he himself elsewhere Mat. 19.19 Luk. 18.20 Eph. 6.2 1 Pet. 2.17 and his Apostles commands which is most false Therefore thirdly I answer that the honor that Christ there speaks of is meant of the approbation and applause of one another as to their Life and Actions which these Pharisaical Jews Inordinately gaped after and meerly relied upon without seeking therein to be approved of God This is confirmed to be the meaning from other Parallel Scriptures where Christ says that these Pharisaical Jews did all things for to be seen of men and that they might have glory of men Mat. 6.2 5. Mat. 23.5 that is to say as is plain in all their works they hunted after the meer applause and approbation of men And again the Text it self shews this to be the meaning in holding forth the receiving of the honor there meant as inconsistent with true Faith which cannot agree to the receiving of that Civil honor injoyned in the Fifth Commandment but it well agrees with that honor Taxed by Christ in the Pharisees both Negatively and Positively We shall stand here no longer Only it is too too notour what regard the Quakers have unto the Sixth and Ninth Commandments while by opprobrious Railings and lying Calumnies as witness all their Printed Pamphlets they bear most false witness against and endeavour to Murther the good Name and Reputation of all men who will not Dance unto their Tune and cry a Confederacy unto their Soul-damning Delusions These are the avowed Principles and open Practises of the Quakers by which Christian Reader I thought it not amiss to give thee a small hint of the Superlative measures of Piety whereunto the Quakers shrewdly pretend that thou mightest from the Claw as we say discern the Lion and mightest not be soon shaken in mind or suddenly carried away with the specious pretences of the Quakers who by their huge claims unto Godliness empty Casks and shallow Streams make most noise and their dropping in of their Principles especially among their younger Proselytes under a number of Enigmatical Riddles wrapt up in the chiefest Clouds of Darkness or a misrepresenting and transforming Vail whereby they are Metamorphosed into another likeness and the Snare is hid until the Prey be Catched and the Poison till the Morsel be swallowed down They have so Blind-folded the eyes and misled some simple and ignorant people that having once Espoused their Cause they are hard to be regained Some are of mind that it is in vain and to no purpose to offer to reason with or redargue the Quakers in regard of the unstayedness and mutability of their Principles proceeding from the variableness of their new pretended Revelations But I am more Charitable to the Quakers For I am sure though their Principles were as changeable as the Moon and unstayed as the Weather-cock they must hold one of the parts of the Contradiction and so they must either acknowledge and yield our Doctrine and Thesis and then we are agreed or else they must contradict our Doctrine and Thesis and then let them answer our irresistable Arguments For they cannot hold both parts of the Contradiction otherwise they shall contradict themselves and be bound to hold and maintain our doctrine as well as their own and so their Principles shall consist of an Hodg-podge of Self-murthering contradictions each of them cutting anothers throat Nor can they hold none of the parts of Contradiction but proclaim both of them to be together false otherwise they shall proclaim all their own Principles and Positions to be false as well as ours like the Witches destroying a Friend for a Foes sake for each of their Principles and Positions is one of the parts of a Contradiction and sometimes both viz. when they assert formal Repugnances and I can easily give a contradictory Proposition to every one of them or to any Proposition imaginable yea if none of the parts of the Contradiction were true then there would be no true saying in the world seeing every true saying is one of the parts of a Contradiction But here I must cut off and crave thy Pardon Courteous Reader for presuming so far upon thy good humour with so Large a Preface albeit I hope I have lost no time to thee or my self either with Idle Self-Apologies or otherwise vain and needless Complements but have been Travelling in matters both pertinent to the purpose in hand and in themselves Important That thou mayest be throughly Established in the Truth of Jesus and mayest hold fast the mystery of Faith in a pure Conscience being fruitful in every good work receiving in end the Crown of Life is the earnest Prayer of the Author who is Thy unworthy Servant in all Christian Duty John Alexander THE QUAKERS QUERIES THe Quakers Queries here follow to be represented to one view in the same Order as they were directed and sent unto me from a Convent of that Profession though but Signed with one of their hands where the Reader may see that in my Surveys I alter their Method as to order and place that I might bring together such Queries as are Homogeneous and of one or like Nature though without the least mutation of either their Matter or Expression or changing of the order of
day of general judgment pag. 99. Conditions of the two Covenants described and distinguished pag. 187. A Confession requisite in a Church and why pag. 123. Our Confession of Westminster materially Scripture-sentence p. 128. Consequential fundamental errors do not Physically and Entitatively unchurch pag. 200. Consequential Scripture is Infallible Scripture-rule p. 63. Consequential Scripture necessary to prove Jesus the true Messias pag. 64. Consequential Scripture necessary against Idolatry pag. 65. Consequential Scripture not founded upon Principles of meer humane reason pag. 66. Consequential Scripture no addition to the Scripture ibid. Conversion wherein it essentially consists pag. 157. The Disciples converted before the first Gospel Supper pag. 97. The Covenant the same in substance under both Testaments p. 85. Courtesie and Capping lawful among Christians pag. 205. D ONe day of seven a Sabbath-day Moral and perpetual pag. 104. Every day not a Christian Holy-day proved pag. 111. The Lords day mentioned Revel 1.10 not meant of any indeterminate day pag. 108. The Lords day meant determinately of the first day of the week ibid. Death described pag. 100. The Decrees of God are eternal pag. 141. Conditional Decrees in God depending upon conditions not by him determined vain and repugnant pag. 143. The Dictate in all men not the principal Rule pag. 33. The Dictate in all men not Essentially right ibid. The Dictate in all men subjected to the Scriptures pag. 35. A Dictate of the Spirit Immediate and Objective in no man p. 49. A Dictate within Immediate and Objective not needful pag. 32. Christ died not for all men but only for the Elect proved p. 138. A Directory of a Church distinguisht into two Notions pag. 120. A Directory warrantable in a Church pag. 122. Church Directories not Infallible pag. 123. A Directory formed rightly of a mixed nature depending partly upon Scripture general Precepts and partly flowing from Christian prudence pag. 128. E EFfective enlightning of the Spirit distinct from Objective p. 32. Effective enlightning of the Spirit sufficient without Immediate Objective ibid. Efficacy of grace not dependent on mans free will pag. 159. Efficacy of grace from whence pag. 161. The Quakers alternative Efficacy of grace confuted pag. 160. Christs enlightning of every man that comes into the world how to be understood pag. 154. F FAith the only condition of the new Covenant pag. 181. Faith not considered as a work in justification pag. 183. Fighting lawful for Christians against unjust Invaders pag. 204. Free will to Convert not in any unrenewed man pag. 159. Free will in unrenewed men to gracious actions inconsistent with the Efficacy of grace pag. 160. G EXtraordinary Gifts not an Infallible evidence of saving grace pag. 74. The Gospel not Properly but only Synecdochically called the power of God pag. 130. Grace without light proportionable can do nothing p. 156. Grammar described and explained pag. 3. Grammar lawful among Christians and necessary for some men pag. 4. How the Spirit Guides us into all truth pag. 42. H INward habits nourished and maintained by external means p. 41. Supernatural habits simply necessary for supernatural actions pag. 157. Holiness of Believers Children 1 Cor. 7.14 what it does import pag. 85. I SInning by meer Imitation confuted pag. 133. Infants have interest into the Kingdom of Heaven pag. 88. Immediate Inspiration of the Doctrine of grace ceased in the Church and not now upon any ground of promise to be lookt for p. 55. Interpretation of Scripture is needful in the Church pag. 52. Interpretation of Scripture is of Divine Institution and explained what it is pag. 55. Scriptures may be Interpreted by men whose gifts are fallible p. 59. Scriptures are the rule of Interpreting Scriptures pag. 58. The meaning of Scripture Interpreted by Scripture is Scripture-rule pag. 61. Interpreting of Scriptures is no adding to the Scriptures ibid. Justification how it is held by Protestants pag. 174. Justification how it is held by the Quakers pag. 175. Justification by inherent or inward Righteousness either as a cause or condition refuted pag. 181. K KIlling in just defence against the unjust Invaders of a Kingdom lawful vid. fighting lawful for Christians How the kingdom of God is said to be within us Luk. 17.2 p. 40. Knowledge in Divine things how it differs in renewed and unrenewed men pag. 37. L LAnguages how necessary to be learnt and why pag. 4. Christ as God was never under the Law pag. 212. How the Law is said to be written upon our hearts Jer. 30.33 pag. 38. Learning how necessary for a Minister pag. 5. Sufficient light in all men to Salvation confuted pag. 151. Light within all men not the principal Rule pag. 33. Christ how said to live in a true Christian explained pag. 213. Logick described and divided pag. 5. Logick a gift of God pag. 6. Logick lawful and necessary among Christians ibid. Lies reported in the Scripture not Scripture-sentence pag. 19. M MErit of good works pregnant with contradictions and confuted pag. 186. An External Ministery to continue to the worlds end in the Church pag. 60. N BY Nature all men are corrupt pag. 132. Natural men are not sufficiently enlightened to Conversion or Salvation pag. 151. Natural parts are necessary for a Minister pag. 202. O IT is not God that obeys God in us pag. 212. Ordination of our first Reformers in time of Popery was valid quoad substantiam pag. 199. Ordination in the time of Popery before the Reformation did not necessarily make these Ordained the Popes Emissaries p. 198. Ministerial Authority received by external Ordination pag. 202. P A Great difference betwixt Papists now and before the Council of Trent pag. 200. Perfection distinguished and described pag. 165. Perfection of degrees in this life confuted ibid. Perfection in a Moral sence not inferred upon the agent or action by Scripture writing pag. 171. Perfection not inferred from the acceptance of our good works ibid. Paul not perfect when be wrote to the Romans pag. 167. The persons in the God-head proved pag. 29. The persons in the God-head Eternal pag. 214. Philosophy described and explained pag. 8. Philosophy among Christians lawful pag. 9. Philosophy a gift of God ibid. Philosophy how rightly used and how not ibid. The Dictate within the principal rule of Faith according to the Quakers pag. 28. The principal rule the Scriptures not the Dictate within pag. 30. Psalms-metring requires not immediate Inspiration pag. 118. Psalms-singing of Divine Institution pag. 112. Psalms made upon sad lots may be Sung pag. 115. Psalms that are not our case may be Sung pag. 116. Psalms threatning Curses against notorious wicked men may be Sung pag. 117. What Psalms were sung in the Primitive Church pag. 118. Punishing of evil doers a duty incumbent to the Magistrates p. 205. Q QUakers Jesuitical and Popish in their Principles pag. 206. Quakers smell deeply of Supererogation pag. 208. Quakers great Slanderers pag. 206. A Quakers Minister described according to their own Principles pag.
But what shall we do with the Isle of Britain which I believe was first used by Heathens must we therefore leave it let the Quakers be first gone then Again if Artificial or School-Logick be a gift of God and he its Author then it cannot be unlawful among Christians wherever it was first used seeing the Gifts of God are not unlawful among Christians Now that it is a gift of God is evident seeing it must either be a gift of God or else a fruit of Adams Fall and mans corruption for there is no other thing to be said But it s against all Religion reason and sense to say that Adams Fall or mans corruption should cause us to understand how to Define Divide c. therefore it must be a gift of God But say the Quakers Elisha the Ploughman Amos the Herdsman Peter and John the Fishermen were not bred up in Grammar and Logick and yet they were Ministers of Christ Ans What then I pray must all Ministers be exactly in every point such as these were or is it good consequence to argue from an extraordinary Fact to an ordinary fixed Rule let them go on then and argue from all the extraordinary works that God hath at any time done in the first publishing of the Law and Gospel unto ordinary fixed Rules for the same reason carries all These men being extraordinarily called of God to an extraordinary work were by him extraordinarily furnisht with whatever was needful for their work and so though by their education they acquired no Logick or Grammar yet beside natural Logick and experimental Grammar in their Native Tongue which they wanted not by extraordinary Inspiration or Infusion they had asmuch of them as was requisite for their work Must God then be Tempted or can they tie him to do that same thing ordinarily which he hath sometimes done extraordinarily This is a proud prescribing of Laws to God not to men We must therefore wait for the blessing of God upon our diligent use of the ordinary means of knowledge and not with the Quakers tempting God look without ground for extraordinaries every day whereof they are as scarce as any Society in the world beside for all their vain boasting Behold here also the Quakers Blindness they alledge that Peter and John had no Grammar and Languages whereas it is manifest that God at the Pentecost among other things bestowed the gift of Tongues upon them before he would send them forth to publish the Gospel to the world which notably enervats the adversaries position and highly commends the use of Grammar and Tongues Second QUERY Or how long was it after Christ and the Apostles days that that Grammar Logick and Philosophy and Schools of learning were set up to make Ministers of Christ Jesus SVRVEY It seems the Quakers are in a perpetual Dream for Schools of learning were set up before Moses's time seeing Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians Act. 7.22 and the Sciences taught at Babylon were long before Christs days Dan. 1.4 and they were set up for the increase of Knowledge maintaining of Equity and the preservation of humane Societies But wherein I pray can it be liable to censure that every man cast in his mite of the small Reliques of Natures yet sparkling light into the common Treasury for the good and benefit of Mankind for every man hath not all knowledge to need no help of his Neighbors gifts but every one his several portion which when it is communicated it is profitable to others but when it is suppressed and kept up it is a spark of light held Prisoner and a portion of knowledge concealed in unrighteousness This abundantly justifies Schools of learning But what do the Quakers feign Philosophy to be Is it not an Habit or Doctrine teaching us to know God and his works so far as by the light of Nature and reason we can reach them Is it unlawful then to Study to know God and his works Then an Atheist and a brutish fool such as is described Psal 32.9 Psal 92.6 will be fittest to be a Minister to the Quakers Or is it unlawful to Study to know God and his works by means of the light of Nature and reason Then the Heathen world could never lawfully Study any knowledge of God and his works seeing they had no other or better means Nay then the light of Nature and reason must be rejected and abandon'd as an unlawful and sinful means for that purpose and certainly good for no other purpose imaginable if not for that Now that Philosophy teaches us to know somewhat concerning God and his works is most manifest For it teaches us to know that there is a God that he is Infinite Eternal Omniscient Omnipotent Unchangeable c. that every thing either is or is not that nothing can both be and not be at once that of every contradiction the one part is true and the other false that every whole is more than its part that every cause is prior in Nature to its effect that nothing can work before it exist that all Creatures are changeable that every man is a rational Creature the Quakers I fear should be excepted that the Soul of man is immortal that no action can be without some Subject nor without some Effect nor any Union without some extremes that no brute is a man nor darkness any positive being These things and a Thousand times more that I may not here stand to reckon Philosophy teaches us to know concerning God and his works the truth whereof is evident which if the Adversaries question let them come forward with sharp-edged Arguments and not dare us always with meer blunt assertions These things prove that Philosophy teaches us to know several things concerning God and his works And I am sure those that have the greatest knowledge and deepest reach into these and other Philosophical principles may lawfully communicate the same to others for their Instruction nay they may not lawfully conceal it in unrighteousness as is before shewed Again Philosophy as I argued of Logick is either a gift of God and then it cannot be unlawful among Christians or else it is a fruit of Adams Fall and mans corruption seeing God is the Author of all we have beside But it cannot be an effect or fruit of these for what ignorant Dunce or impudent face will or dare say that Adams Fall or mans corruption hath taught men the foresaid Principles and Conclusions of Philosophy which were instanced What Is it unlawful for Christians to endeavour after some knowledge of God and his works let them consider and answer these Scriptures then Job 37.14 Psal 77.12 Psal 92.5 6. Psal 3.2 Rom. 1.19 20. Every man hath some Philosophy either Natural or else both that and Artificial also It s a strange Doctrine that Teaches that the more ignorant Ass a man is he is the more fit to be a Christian or a Minister Balaams Sadle-bearer would
for that which is before clean needs no more cleansing Fifthly They object That the Apostle says 1 Cor. 7.28 That though a Woman Marry she hath not sinned Therefore there are some actions at least free of all sin Ans If this objection proved any thing it would prove that Reprobates and Pagans also have perfect works Secondly I answer that Paul there means of the action of Marriage considered in respect of it's nature and kind and in order to its proper object as abstracted from all particular circumstances which may attend it which way the action hath no evil in it otherwise it could not be lawful to Marry whereas to forbid Marriage is a Doctrine of Devils 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3. Nevertheless albeit the action of Marriage so considered be not sinful yet seeing every particular action is necessarily exercised in several Circumstances wherewith it ought or ought not to be cloathed it may easily be defiled and become sinful by the Vesture of evil Circumstances instead whereof it should have been cloathed with good ones especially adding the impurity and uncleanness of the Agent which exerts it self in every particular action Sixthly The Quakers object and hereby they endeavour to prove the perfection both of the Saints and of their good works in this life The Saints say they have in this life perfect good works Therefore the Saints in this life must be perfect They prove the Consequence because perfect Effects crave perfect Causes They prove the Antecedent because they are acceptable to God and because if they be not perfect then they are sinful but sinful they cannot be seeing God commands them who commands not things sinful Ans Our good works are acceptable to God thorow Christ into whom all believers are by Faith Ingrafted and thorow whom alone both their persons and good works are accepted but none of aur good works here-away ore in themselves acceptable to God seeing they are still Imperfect Again God accepts them as they are good that is Sincerely done not as they are Imperfect and so evill and so from their acceptation their perfection follows not To the Second I Answer that God Commands our good works not as we perform them but as we ought to perform nor yet as they are defective as to the Degree he does not Command their gradual defect but he Commands them as they are good in respect of their Nature and kind So the objection perishes Seventhly they endeavour to prove that Christians have at least some perfect Actions in this Life and for that purpose they Inquire of us if the Apostles sinned in writing the Scripures Ans First this will not prove the perfection of any Action of any man now living except they can first prove him to have as large a measure of grace and of the Spirit 's Influence and Assistance as the Apostles had when they wrote the Scriptures which will be hard enough I think for them to get done Secondly the writing of the Scriptures wherein the Prophets and Apostles were but Pen-men for the Holy Ghost dictated all may consist with some Degree of imperfection as the Action is considered Morally and as lyable to the Law of God David and Asaph wrote Scriptures when they were not perfect Psal 51 10. and 73 22. or else beside the Instances given what will they say of an Hypocrites writing over in whole or in part the whole Scriptures and of every Action of Printing while our Printers print them over But Thirdly for full satisfaction I Answer that in that Action the Apostles did not at all sin upon the matter which yet is the most Formal sense of the objection which thus proposed directly imports the matter seeing the matter of the Action did perfectly agree with the Law of God as also the Action of an unrenewed man may doe Secondly there was much good in it compared with all the rest of the causes and so it was sincere and of another nature and kind then any Action of an unrenewed man is or can be seeing the principles thereof love to God and men The ends thereof the glory of God and good of Souls the form and manner wherein it was done in obedience to God were all certainly good Yet considering it as a Moral Action lyable to God's Law it was surely for the reasons given Defective and Imperfect as to the exact and compleat Degree of love to God and men and respect to the glory of God and good of Souls and Acting in it in pure obedience to Gods Command wherewith every perfect Action is to be qualified They will may be say that then the Scriptures would be in danger to Contract some Impurity from the Impurity of the Agent and Action of writing Ans That is false as appears from our Instances of an Hypocrite and Printer and of David and Asaph when they were not pure or perfect And if the Doctrine written did necessarily Contract any impuritie from the impurity of the writer by the same Reason and with more Reason seeing the Tongue is a more Immediat Instrument of the Heart then the Hand the Doctrine Preached should Contract some Impurity from the Impurity of the Preacher which is manifestly false to the Worlds eye Christ was the external object of the persecutive Actions of the Jews yet he Contracted no Impurity from thence But the Quakers urge saying though we cannot do all we ought to do yet that which we do we may do it perfectly Ans This reply must either be understood of diverse Actions so that the sense shall be though we cannot do all the good Actions we ought to do yet that Action or these Actions which we do we may do it or them perfectly which seeing by Perfectly they must mean the perfection of Degrees and otherwise it would be nothing to their purpose of a sinless perfection which they plead we must deny because of these and many other Scriptures Prov. 20 9. Eccles 7 20. Galat. 5 17. Rom. 7 21. or else that reply must be understood of one and the same Action And so the sense is though we cannot do an Action in that perfect degree of goodness that we ought yet in that degree of goodness wherein we do it we may do it perfectly where it being the perfection of degrees which is here Controverted and by the Adversaries pleaded for and otherwise we should have no debate with them here their reply involves a strong Contradiction viz. that any Action performed below that degree of goodness which it ought to have should notwithstanding be performed perfectly in respect of the perfection of Degrees seeing so it would both want and yet not want some Degree of goodness which it ought to have For these reasons I justly deny the latter part of their proposition Sixteenth QUERY Can any man be saved by his own works Self-righteousness will worship And are not all men in Self-righteousness that are not in the righteousness of Christ Jesus And
he may be on the Street in a cold Frost and Snow Such a fire would burn all by the way I fear Would it not be a long Dagger that wounding or killing him at London would also reach him at Jerusalem and wound or kill him there too And yet it would be a strong Contradiction to be otherwise It would be strange if he lost his eyes at London where no body is troubling him because some body hath pluckt them out at Jerusalem and yet it behooved to be so or else he should be blind and yet not blind both at once and behooved also to have before more eyes then two seeing he hath lost two as is supposed and yet he sees Would it not be very strange if the man being a hanging at Jerusalem should by some secret and blind Influence of the Hang-man there be also forced to the Gibbet at London where no man is offering him any Violence nay albeit all in the City were by force endeavouring his rescue for hang and die he must in the one place as well as in the other or else he shall be hang'd and yet not hang'd dead and yet not dead both at once So also if the same Individual man could be in many diverse and distant places at once let him be in London York and New-Castle all at once let him remain still at York some days at London let him take journey upon some occasion to York from New-Castle also let him take journey to Edinburgh Now this man is both drawing nearer and removing further from himself at York and that in respect of local nearness and he is both moving and not moving in respect of local motion all at once and he is also both distant and yet not distant from York at once seeing by the way in his journey to York and Edinburgh he behooved to be distant there-from and not present therein and yet this is in one and the same respect viz. of local distance Let not the Jesuits then tell us of diverse respects here Are not these a number of brave Contradictions Nursed in the bosom of the Quakers exception Vindicating them as they hope from a Popish Justification nay by this addition of Contradictions they have made their Justification much worse in place of bettering it and have laid the way also fairly for the Popish transubstantiation seeing their exception here includes the very Grounds wherewith the Papists endeavour but without success to support that Seventeenth QUERY Whether or not the Scriptures do not say that he that believes hathceased from his own works as God did from his and entred into his rest and whether or not your directory and Church-maid Faith and Catechisms and Confessions be not your own works and ye follow them and worship them and not cease from them And whether or not in so doing ye keep people and your selves in your own works and from the rest or we desire you shew us what difference their is betwixt Spiritual Babylon and Sodom and Egypts works of their hands and Temporal Babylon and Sodom and Egypts works of their hands and their worship Of each distinguish I desire you Distinguish the mystery from a plain outward Idol SVRVEY The Quakers are still in the same tune here the scope of their query is mostly to throw calumnies upon the Church of God in Britain and to persuade the World if they could to believe that she did set up her Directory Confession and Catechism as an outward Idol for people to worship O impudent slanderers men of seared Consciences whom did ever our Church bid worship these or who ever did it in our Church But this is no new thing with the Quakers who it seems have Monopolized the whole trade of accusing the Brethren and outed the Devil of a great part of his Imployment For they never almost open their mouth without either Blaspheming God and his truth or slandering of men They are certainly extreamly galled at the heart with our Confession Catechism c. For though these had been the intire Subject of three of their queries and a part of a Fourth before yet here they cannot forget them and if truth will not take their part against them they 'l out brave the Devil in lying Flectere si nequeant superos acheronta movebunt In the next place the Ground whereby the Quakers Condemn here our Confession Catechism c. is because they are our own works But by our own works the Quakers either mean of evil works or of good works if of evil works they should have proved them to be evil before they had condemned them which I defie them and their inspirer both to do But why do they enveigh here against our Faith also they have long since rejected Faith as it s taken Correlatively and as related to its object which it apprehends and relies upon And do they now Condemn it absolutely as it is a quality and a work nay then I am sure they have neither Faith nor Truth Or is it only our Faith in the Concret and in Hypothesi which they Condemn here they should have given some grounds for that then or else their Sentence is unjust If the Quakers by our own works mean of good works then they Condemn our good works What then would they have us to do viz. evil or nothing if evil the advice is evil if nothing then they would have a Christian to be a meer dead Corps or a Lots wife Metamorphosed into a pillar of Salt never imployed in doing any thing but continuing as a sensles Trunk to be a prodigie on Earth and a mocking-stock to Heaven Is this the Quakers vaunted of perfection consisting in the omission of all manner of works and doing nothing This would agree better to a dog after he is dead then to Christians alive who if they do not something and that good neglect a duty whereunto they are obliged The Scripture which they here hint at from Heb. 4 10. does not Condemn our good works which are every where in Scripture exhorted to and Commanded The Apostle therefore means there only of our works proceeding from our Corrupt Nature which works are evil from which he asserts that every believer hath ceased viz. Inchoatively as the Apostle in the very place Intimats while he calls it an entering into rest the work of Sanctification and Holiness being Begun in us and we Entered into the rest thereof though it be not Perfected till we be going hence But say the Quakers whether or not in so doing do ye not keep people and your selves in your own works and from the rest But what kind of rest do the Quakers mean of here if they mean the rest of Sanctification Holiness or Heaven I have before shewed that our Confessions Catechisms c. Are inferior helps and means Conducing to set us forward to that rest they are so far from keeping us from it Or do they mean the rest of Idleness and
any reproof from Christ or his Apostles though most material when they are reproving all the other vices of that Old-Testament-Church We may clearly see that these Apocryphal books are no part of Scripture-Canon or rule place them in what degree ye will next for that I care not but a part or all of these things misses none of these books As for what ye object Sir of many books wanting that might be useful as ye say in the Scripture-Canon I must tell you to cut short that I am not here concerned what books are wanting that is none of the present controversie but it is concerning some books viz. these called Apocryphal which ye will have added to the Canon with the rest that are known to be Canonical and which we deny to be Canonical and requires you the affirmers to prove that they are such and though not obliged as being the denyers yet we have proved they are not such And hereby I cut off your tedious rapsody of confused arguments whereby ye have wasted more paper in your Quakerism no Popery pag. 60.61.62.63 then all your work was worth But the Quakers have one grand principle of following the Dictate within as the principal rule at least which it would seem and George Keith also insinuates Quakerism no Popery pag. 49.59 103. will never reconcile with that other grand principle of Popery to believe as the Church of Rome believes But unto this I Answer that a great number we see of the direct principles of the Quakers are but meer Popish doctrines disguised nay all of their principles almost except some that are much worse being more Blasphemous then ever a Papist held and that of following the dictate within is but a reflex principle obliging them the more to follow their direct principles which we see are generally Popish And so when their great doctors teach their disciples to follow their Dictate within they do in effect teach them to believe as the Church of Rome does yet not so as to discover their design and make every man wise of their secret but subtilly under a disguise They are no fools Albeit they can desipere in loco Sir I have vindicated our Church from the Intire frivolous charge of Popery Calumniously cast upon her by you in your Quakerism no Popery and upon the other hand I have libelled against your eighteen real Popish principles from which ye can make no evasion or tergiversation they are all so clear in the preceeding survey And therefore I must here tell you that your Quakerism no Popery should have been called Quakerism no Verity for there is hardly one true word in it all which I do'nt say to irritate or exasperate you but rather with a desire from my heart if it be possible to convince you for I know you are a Scholar but alace your gifts and parts are ill Imployed against the truths laws and ordinances of Jesus which his dear purchase of them teaches their great value Be no more a stated Enemy to these or else dreadful and terrible shall the event be unto you and all who thus tread upon his truths and Blaspheme his Person as you do and trample under foot also his whole Institutions and ordinances A Second Postscript for Doctor Everards Ghost There is one Doctor Everard I wish he had been never heard who hath published a book which he calls Gospel Treasury opened up or the Holiest of all Un-vailing and this Book he hath divided into two parts In the first part whereof Pag. 150.206.347 he asserts that after we are regenerated it is no more we that think see speak goe wish will rejoyce but that it is God that does them and that it must be Christ the Son of God in us that loves God fears God obeys God and believes in God and says he though that may seem a Paradox yet it is a truth for Indeed and in truth says he there is nothing fears God but God nothing obeys God but God nothing loves God but God And again he affirms Pag. 442.443.444 part second that the good man is so swallowed up in God that wanting sense will desire he now as the word requires covets nothing but now God in him wills knows desires reads writes preaches gives prays hears and is all things for God says he desires not our works but our Sabbath and that himself in us without hindrance may work know praise pray hear crown and reward himself in us Thus the Doctor teaches the great sum of all which is That nothing obeys God but God only The Quakers seem to joyn with the Doctor in this his wild principle while at the last of their Queries here they seem to require our resting or not working and condemn our Confessions Catechisms c. upon that very ground because they are our works and to my sure experience I do know that this book of Doctor Everard hath predisposed several persons and been their preamble unto Quaking and therefore that this treatise may be somewhat compleat I resolve here to answer this principle of the Doctor and to confute it and two or three more of his positions that have some alliance with the principles of the Quakers Therefore first against the Doctors foresaid principle it is not God that believes in Christ crucified accepts and receives his righteousness for justification that looks for salvation through his merits It is not God that loaths himself for sin sorrows for his sin confesses his sin and denies himself c. And these are all works of obedience commanded of God and exercised in the godly and therefore the Doctors principle here is most false 2ly Angels and men are either obliged to obey God or not if not then they may doe what they please they cannot sin and so also fallen Angels and reprobate men are all most unjustly damned for their disobedience wherewith they cannot be justly charged seeing as is supposed they are not obliged to obey If then they be obliged to obey God then the holy Angels that stood obeys God or not if they do then something obeys God that is not God against the Doctors principle seeing Angels are not God I am sure if not then the holy Angels that stood are disobedient to God seeing they are obliged to obey God and yet does it not and that is to say the Angels that stood are fallen Angels 3ly If nothing obeys God but God then never any of all the creatures obeyed God to this day seeing none of them is God and all the creatures are equally guilty or not guilty of disobedience to God seeing not one of them ever obeyed him But these things are absurd Romances Fourthly whatever obeys God must be commanded to obey him seeing all obedience is to some command and Law But God is not commanded to obey seeing all the commandments are directed to creatures and God is not under the Law he hath given to them nor hath he any superior soveraign and though
Christ was under the Law as man yet he was never under it as God or else so should the Father and Spirit also seeing they are all one and the same God though they be distinct persons Therefore God cannot be said to obey God in any proper speech and the Doctor we see by his expressions above rehearsed means properly Lastly the Doctor here contradicts himself for if God requires our Sabbath and not working as he affirms and the regenerate and good man does so lay aside all works as he no more thinks sees speaks goes wishes wills c. as he affirmeth too then the good man obeys God In doing that which God requires of him and yet the Doctor denies that any thing obeys God but God himself But the Doctor may be would object that the good works of the Saints are in the Scripture ascribed to God and said to be done by his power Ephes 1.19 Philip. 1.6 and 2.13 2 Thes 1.11 Ans God is indeed a very special Title the principal efficient cause of all our good works and the Scriptures ascribe that unto him But no Scripture saith that in our works of obedience only God obeyeth himself in us for the reasons given that could not be Nor can it be said that it is God that in us wishes wills prays believes desires c. Seeing these actions are not Immanent in God but are meerly transient as to him and its Impossible for any person to will wish desire c. by any act not Immanent in it self â—s any man knows But these good works and actions whereunto we are quickened and determined by God and his grace and Spirit are Formally subjected in us and Immanent and so being Intrinsecally united and Informing us cannot but give us their Intrinsecal and formal denomination for an act of love being Immanent or united to my will or affections cannot but denominate me as loving some object and it cannot so denominate any other person as is manifest Though God therefore workes in us the acts of obedience faith repentance yet it is not God that obeys believes repents c. The Quakers afford us another objection from Gal. 2.20 where Paul denies himself to live viz. Spiritually but that Christ lived in him Ans Paul does not there deny himself to live Spiritually or vitally to exerce the operations of a Spiritual life or else if that were Then Paul was then Spiritually as dead a man as before he was converted which is most false and in the very next words he declares himself to live viz. Spiritually When therefore he denies himself to live Spiritually but Christ in him he plainly means of the fountain and source or stock and supply of his Spiritual life viz. That that was not in himself or in nature but in Christ the redeemer and so the objection proves not their point The Doctor teaches also in that same book Pag. 16.17.299.361 part first And Pag. 27.29.259.264.265 part second That take but off all accidents from every creature and that which remains is Christ and God as if we take away all height and depth greatness and littleness weight and measure heat and cold matter and form for says he these are all accidents and then that which is left is Christ is God God is the substance of all things and all the creatures are but meer accidents and they are not only Gods workmanship as most men teach and believe but also God is their very substance and Being he is their very Essence and Being Thus he But if these things were so God would be the most passive Being in all the world for so he should be the passive subject whereinto all creatures should inhere as meer accidents and he should be the passive and changed subject in all their mutations and alterations This would make a very changeable God more changeable then the Moon or Wind. 2ly If God be the very Being and Essence of every creature then every creature is Essentially God Almighty Infinite Eternal c. for that whose Being and Essence is God must in respect of its Essence or Essentially be God or else in respect of its Essence it will be both God and not God which is a Contradiction 3ly If God be the Being and Essence of every creature then the Being and Essence of every creature is an uncreated Being seeing God is such and so every creature as to its Essence or Essentially is not a creature that is to say it is Essentially not it self 4ly Every evil action is a creature if then God be the being of every creature then he is the being of every evil action too and so the sin inhering into every evil action shall inhere into God absit Blasphemia who is the being of the action Lastly If all creatures be but meer accidents and if God be the very Essence and Being of every creature then God shall also be an accident meerly he being the very essence and Being of these created accidents as the Doctor will Blasphemous Absurd and Repugnant The Doctor also teaches pag. 83.84.343 part first that if we speak of God Abstractedly from all creatures so the Father Son and Spirit are all one But if we come to speak of any thing created then we divide the Godhead into Persons and there is Immediatly Father Son and Spirit When God puts forth himself in the creating of any creature here now the Word is spoken and came forth from the bosom of his Father before there was any creature made there was neither Father Son nor Spirit in the Godhead as divided for the Trinity is expressed only in relation to creatures Thus he But by the Oneness or Unity of the Father Son and Spirit as God is spoken of Abstractedly from Creatures the Doctor either means of the Oneness of their Essence and Godhead and thus they are still one what ever way we speak of them seeing they are still but one God or else he thereby means of the Unity and Oneness of their persons and this way which is the way he doth mean which appears by his opposing the distinction of their persons in the second member of his Antithesis to the unity mentioned in the first the Doctor teaches meer blasphemy in denying that there was any distinction of persons in the Godhead before God made any creature and except in relation to creatures for so if God had never made any creature which might easily have been seeing he did not create by necessity or impulsion there should never-have been three persons in the Godhead nay nor any person for before God made any creature there was neither Father Son nor Spirit in the Godhead and the Trinity is expressed only in relation to creatures says the Doctor So also the three distinct persons in the Godhead must be meerly temporary created within time if there was no distinct person in the same before the creatures were made Yea so the persons in the Godhead shall be debitors to