comp with Ioh. 7 38 39. 2. It is affirmed that he is in them and abideth in them Psal. 51 11. Rom. 8 9 11 15. 1 Cor. 2 12. Gal. 4 6. 1 Tim. 3 14. 1 Ioh. 2 27. Rom. 5 5. 3. He Sealeth them unto the day of redemption Ephes. 1 23. 4 30. 2 Cor. 1 21. 4. He is a Spirit of Adoption Rom. 8 15. Gal. 4 5 6. 10. Fourthly If we consider the Covenant of Redemption betwixt Iehovah and the Lord Mediator this will be abundantly evinced For 1. The Father hath given a number to Christ to save Ioh. 17 2 9 11 12. 6 37 39. And Christ hath undertaken to save them Ioh. 6 37 39 40. 2. The Father hath undertaken that Christ shall see his seed Esa. 53 10. and see of the travel of his soul be satisfied Esa. 53 11. Psal. 72 8. 3. Christ had a commission to goe about this work to bring many sones unto glory was qualified for this end Esai 61 1 2 3. Esa. 42 6 7. 49 9. Heb. 2 10. 4. The Fathâ—r hath promised to give Christ what he asketh Psal. 2 8. 89 2â— 27 28. 5. Yea He hath sworne that he shall have an issue Psal. 89 35 36. Act. 2 30 31. Psal 132 11 12. 2 Sam. 7 12. 1 King 8 25. Luk. 1 61. 11. Fiftly The consideration of the nature of the Covenant of Grace will conâ—â—rme this for that is an everlasting and unchangable Covenant and haâ—h the promise of Perseverance in its bosome Gen. 17 vers 7. Ier. 31 vers 31 32 33. 32 vers 38 â—9 40. Ezech 11 17 18 19 20. Hos 2 19 23. Ioh 6 54 56. Esai 54 10. 12. Sixtly The Grace infused in souls according to the Covenant of grace is of an enduring nature especially considering how it is Watered Preserâ—ed and Cared for It is a remaining seed 1 Ioh. 3 9. sowne in good ground Luk. 8.15 by the rivers of water Psal. 1 3. And watered every moment Esai 27.3 See Ioh. 4 14. 7 38. And so is differenced from Gifts and Common graces and from temporary Faith and grace that evanisheth in the day of tryal 1 Ioh. 2 19. Luk. 8 18. Ioh 2 23 24. Mat 13 21. Ioh. 17 9. what this true faith is see Tit. 1 1. 1 Tim. 1 5 Gal. 5 6. 2 Pet. 1 1. 13 Seventhly The consideration of the hurt and dammage that the Asserting of the Apoâ—tasie of the Saints bringeth necessarâ—ly with it unto Christians may have its owne weight here For 1 Then they could not in faith and confidence pray for it for what is purely in the power of mans Free will and is not the sole work of God and of his grace we cannot we need not pray for contrare to Ioh. 14 13 14. Ephes. 3 17 18. 1 Thes. 5 23 â—4 and the Lords prayer teacheth us to pray that his Name be hallowed that his Kingdom come and that his Will be done in earth as in heaven 2. This would destroy their Hope and Confidence in God for preservation in the times of tryal and temptation contrare to Rom. 8 vers 35 38 39. 3. This would take away their joy of the holy Ghost anâ— Consolation and give ground of continual Anxiety Doubts Feares c. 14. Eightly The consideration of the blow that this doctrine would give unto many articles of our Faith and undoubted truths of our Religion may confirme us against it As 1 It would render the Obedience and Sufferings of Christ null and useless for he should then suffer and die and no man might be saved or healed by his stripes and death 2. It would also render his Resurrection Ascension and Sitting at the Fathers right hand ineffectual For notwithstanding thereof no man might be saved 3. It destroyeth his Death as the Death of a Cautioner for no man can be said to have died with him risen with him and to sit with him in heavenly places contrary to Rom. 6 3 4 5 8. Eph. 2 5 6. Col. 3 1. nor can he be said to prepare mansions for anâ— contrare to Ioh. 14 2 3. 4. It maketh the grand promise of the Spirit null of no effect 5. It taketh away the Catholick Church that shall certainly come to mount Zion and to the innumerable company of angels c. Heb. 12 22 23 24. 6. It would null that Christian Communion and sweet Fellowship of Saints 7. It would make Remission of sins of little comfort 8. And take away the faith of Life Everlasting 15. Having premised these things for clearing and confirming of the truth we come to examine what he sayes against it Pag. 167. § 2. He reasoneth from Iud vers 4. and supposeth that these that turned the grace of God into lasciviousness had once grace not knowing that this was not grace inherent or the true grace of God placed and planted in the soul and wrought there by the Spirit of grace but external grace held forth in the Gospel offer even that grace that shouâ—d have taught them to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and to have lived soberly righteously and godly in this present world Tit. 2 12. It is that grace which is outwardly spoken and preached Act. 14 3. Ephes. 3 2. 1 Pet. 4 10. Next He reasoneth from 1 Tim. 1 19. supposing that that faith which some made shipewrak of was true and saving faith contrare to 2 Tim. â— 17. 4 14. while as it was nothing but the doctrine of faith as the word also is taken 1 Tim. 3 9. 4 1. Gal. 1 23. 3 2 5 23 25. Act. 6 7. Rom. 1 5 8. In the third place he reasoneth from Heb. 6 4 5. Not so much as noticeing that the words are but Conditional and not Absolute if they fall away And that there is nothing here no not one expression that is necessarily to be understood of true and saâ—ing grace and not of meer gifts and common graces given in a more than ordinary measure no one expression here of Regeneration of true Sanctification of Closeing with Christ of their being Justified or Adopted or Elected c. Nay the Apostle compareth them to ground upon which the raine falleth and yet beareth nothing but thornes and briars vers 8. distinguisheth them from those to whom he wrote of whom he expected better thingâ— that accompany salvation vers 9. and from true beleevers vers 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19. When our Quaker out of his friends the Socinians Arminians shall say any thing to prove that these expressions import true and saving grace we may then think it time to spâ—ak more of this but seing he is pleased to give us no more here but his naked assertion we have said enough and so proceed 16. The next thing he alleigeth against this truth is a supposition that he hath undermined the ground thereof viz. Election But how superficially this was attempted we have seen But he sayes
of them He cannot deny but God did permit sin nor will he say that God could not have prevented sins coming into the world if He had pleased will he say that God did not foresee sinnes coming into the world If he did foresee it and might have hindered it if he had pleased and did not hinder it shall we say that sin came into the world whether he would or not And if he willed or decreed that sin should exist through his permission shall we call him the author of sin Then he must be the author of sin because he did not hinder sin effectually by his Omnipotency and then whatever we say of Reprobation whether we affirme it to be Absolute or upon sin Foreseen there is no remedie as to this for God must alwayes be the Author of sin But hallowed be his Name 6. The Decree of Reprobation putteth no man into a state of sin It is true the Execution theâ—eof presupposeth sin but hence it will no more follow that the decree of Reprobation placeth a man in sin than that the decree of Election doth so for the execution here presupposeth also mans being in sin 7. Where readeth he that expression among our divines that by vertue of the decree of Reprobation the Reprobat are secondarily led or to be led to destruction as the end The Lord leadeth no man to destruction but every reprobat runeth head long thither of his own accord and because the Lord hath designed and decreed to let them run-on and not restraine them by saving grace shall he therefore be the Author of their sinnes Then all the sins that are committed must be charged upon the Holy one of Israel because He did not prevent them by his grace And thus the devils may come in play and learne of this man to plead Excuse for themselves and lay the blame of all their wickedness upon God Sure this must be Develish doctrine 8. But what is it that God is the Author and Cause of His hujus doth not distinctly inform us That he is the Author and Cause of his own Act and Decree is most true But that he is the Cause and Author of sin as this man would inferre we see not the Antecedent from whence this Consequence can follow Beside that the Author of a thing is he by whose authority or judgment it is done or upon whose testimony it is beleeved for Cicero opposeth Authorem and dissuasorem and joineth these together as of the same import Hortator atque Author Consiliarius Author Suasor Author Plautus said Impero autorque sum Now dar this Man say that God Exhorteth Counseleth and perswadeth to sin Dar this Man say that we hold or tâ—at it followeth from our juâ—gment that by God's Authority Sentence and Swasion sin is committed Let him prove this and then carry the cause 9. In a word we referre this Man to the Apostle Paul Rom. 9 11 12 13. to receive his answere and let him dispute no more against us till he once take the boldness to confute that his inferring from our doctrine that God is the Author of sin is but the same which the Apostle saw would be deduced from his doctrine by men of corrupt mindes when he addeth by way of Objection vers â—4 Is there unrighteousness with God And if our answere will not satisfie him let him confute the Apostles answere for we but say the same viz. That God hath mercy on whom he will hardeneth whom he will And if for this cause our doctrine be blamed we cannot help it but must be content to be contradicted and if he make use of the reply used vers 19. we must give the returne which the Apostle giveth vers 20 21. And if all this will not satisfie we must leave him to the judgment of the great day when that God against whom these proud carpers thus reply shall answer them by himself put them to eternal silence and everlasting shame 17. Thereafter he citeth some sayings of Calvin Beza Zanchius Pareus Martyr Zuinglius Piscator out of which he would inferre that they allaiged God was the Author of sin All which and moe he might finde collected to his hand by Bellarmin and answered by the learned D. Twisse in his Vindiciae And therefore as also because this belongeth to a distinct question we need neither spend time in searcâ—ing out what truth is in all this not yet in vindicating of them One thing I shall say That among them all he shall not finde one that saith directly that God is the Author and Culpable Cause of sin and if he suppose that this may be drawn from their expressions I shall only reply That if there be any of them that giveth more real ground for such an Inference than the very Expressions used in Scripture I shall not owne them and if they say no more and yet are condemned by him as making God the Author of sin though they expresly deny it let him see how he shall vindicate the Spirit of Goâ— from the same charge or rather how in his blind boldnesse he charges the Spirit of God As for these passages of Scripture which our Divines aâ—duce against the Pelagians and Iesuites who ascribe unto God in the matâ—er of sin an Idle Provideâ—câ— aâ—d Permâ—ssion Bellarmine ranketh them up in five classes First Such as speak of God's Willing and Decreeing from eternity that sin shall exist such are Act. 2 23. 4 27. Esai 53 10. Second Such as import God's creating evil men for this end that his righteousness might shine forth in their punishment such are Prov. 16 4. 1 Sam. 2 25. Exod. 9 16. Rom. 9 17 21. Third Such as import God's setting of Satan and men to evil and useing of them as instruments to do that which could not be done without sin such are 1 King 22 20 23. Iob. 1 12. 2 6. 2 Sam. 16.10 24 1. Esai 5 26. 10 5 15. â—3 17. 19 2 4. Ier. 50 24 25. 51 11. Ezech. 12 13. Psal. 105 25. c. Fourth Such as speak of God's blinding hardening c. as Exod. 4.21 7 3 13. 9.12 10 1 20 27. 1â— 10. 14 4 8. Deut. 2 30. Iosu. 1â— 20. 1 Sam. 2 25. Iob. 12 16 20 24. Esai 19 14. 63 17. Ier. 20 7. Ioh. 12 3â— 40. Rom. 1 24 26 28. 9 18. 2 Thes. 2 11. c. Fift Such as import God's doing of those things which are evil as 2 Sam. 12 11. Luk. 2 34. Rom. 9 33. Esai 8 14. 28 16. Gen. 45 8. 1 King 11 31 37. 12 15 24. 2 King 9 3. 10 30. c. Now if he can adduce any testimony of our Divines whence he can with more probability inferre that God is the Author of sin I shall not as I said owne it And if such as are but consonant to the Scriptures do not please him
There is no difficulty to loose all the mans Arguments if we premit this that by Possible here is meaned such a thing as may be not only in it self and abstracting from the decree of God for if this be his conclusion he concludeth nothing but fighteth with his owne shadow but such a thing as may be in respect of the decree that is that is such a thing the contrare whereof is not decreed by God So that by a thing possible or impossible here is not meaned what is simply so and in its owne nature but what is so ex hypothesi This presupposed I say 1. That his first assumption is false viz. That we may pray for every one for Iohn tels us 1 Ioh. 5 16 there is a sin unto death I do not say sayes he ye should pray for it And the text no more faith that we should Pray for every Man than that we should Give thanks for every man vers 1. And who will think that we are bound to give thanks for the happy state and good condition yea and for the salvation of Apostates and Enemies to the Gospel and for Antichrist and all most prodigiously flagitious persons And thus his whole Argument from this place concludeth nothing though what he addeth in confirmation of the Proposition were all true for the Assumption being false and he saith nothing to prove it the argument is null Yet for further discovery of his weakness I say 2. The Propâ—sition is false for the decree of God which maketh things possible or impossible in the sense wherein we take these termes here not being revealed to us is no rule for our prayers but the Revealed Will and Law of God that is the proper and only ground of Obedience 3. His confirmation of this is no confirmation for it concludeth not the Proposition denyed Nor doth it conclude the Assumption but is really the first argument dressed up in equipollent termes and so must be satisfied with the same answere for it is false that every man is commanded to pray for all Infants are men and yet they are not commanded to pray for any far less for all No man is commanded to pray for all men as we shewed far less for all devils and damned and all dead and all creatures for these come under the tearme all Againe I say it is false that no man is bound to pray for that which is impossible in respect of God's decree I may pray for the life of my Father or my friend and yet it may be decreed by the Lord that he shall die But I must pray therefore with submission to God's holy will and pleasure if he thinketh fit and have not decreed the contrary Christ foretold that Peter should deny him thrice and because it was impossible that Christ should be a liar it was also impossible upon this supposition that Peter should not so deny his master yet it was lawfull for Peter to pray against thâ—s much more may we pray for the salvation of such as it is impossible not to perish in regaird of the decree of God seing that decree is not revealed to us as to such and such particular persons for whom we pray 4. His next argument seemeth to be a proof of the proposition of the second argument for it seemeth to conclude that no man is bound to pray for what is impossible And as to it I say it is true no man is bound to pray but in faith that is in confidence that what he prayeth for is Lawfull and consonant to the revealed will of God and that if the Lord seeth it good and good for him being a beleever it shall be granted and this includeth an holy submission to the supream will of God as to what is not revealed and a submission to his wise providence and care and to his supream power in disposeing and giving out the good things promised when or aâ— what time and in what manner and measure he seeth meet and expedient But that no man can pray in faith for what the Lord hath not decreed to do or grant I deny for reasons already given It was impossible but Christ should have died for for that end came he into the world and he came to suffer the wrath of God for sin and yet he prayed Ioh. 12 27. father save me from this hour And I suppose this Quaker dar not say that this prayer was not in faith But it was it is true with submission as the next words evidence and is cleare Mat. 26 39. So should our prayers be with submission and if it be possible 5. As to his next argument to the proposition I say What God willeth with his will of Purpose Decree and Resolution which is about events is not impossible it is true for it is certane and is not only possible but a thing that shall certainely come to passe for who hath resisted his will and He is of one minde and who can turne him His will thus is Effectual But the Assumption is most false in this sense for if God would thus have all men to be saved they should all be certanely saved unlesse by all men he understand not all and every individual man but indefinitely his owne Elect among all Nations Kindes and Sorts of people whether High or Low Rich or Poor Greek or Barbarian Iew or Gentile and if he take it in this sense his Conclusion will be most sound and we shall accept of it yea we shall say more to wit That most certanely all these men shall be saved yea that it is impossible it should be other wayes But againe as to the Proposition we say what God willeth by his Command and Precept may be oft is impossible in respect of God's decree for God commandeth all men it may be devils and damned who remaine God's creatures to love him perfectly with their whole soul and minde and strength and yet this is not now possible And so as to the Assumption though God should will thus all men to be saved which yet is not true because the Gospel which bringeth salvation is not revealed to all men it would not follow that it were possible that all men should be saved 6. As to his last argument I say for whom Christ gave himself a price of Redemption to them salvation is not only Possible but Certain And as to the Assumption That Christ gave himself a price of Redemption for all is true in this sense that Christ gave himself for all his Owne all his Sheep all his People all that were Given to him of the Father all that shall be Saved all the Elect of whatever Nation Kindred Tongue or Language or whatever Condition they be in the world Magistrates or Subjects Rich or Poor Iewes or Gentiles c. But it is not true in this sense that Christ gave himself a ransome for all and every individual person for he gave not himself for Devils who yet may
by the Covenant of works for that is broken and all are become heires of hell wrath because of the violation of that Covenant Not by the Covenant of Grace for that requireth faith before persons be interessed in these special favoures privileges And the Scripture tels us that all men have not faith how then come all men to share of these highest privileges or of this divine and glorious life which are promised in the Covenant of grace through Jesus Christ by whom they are purchased Is this divine and glorious life so meane and common a thing that even Heathens and Reprobats share of it Sure the divine and glorious life pointed forth in the Scriptures is a rare thing and is the privilege of very few and even of few of those that are members of the visible Church Will this Quaker tell me if this â—ivine and glorious life whereof all Iaponians Brasilians Cannibals are made partakers be distinguished from the divine and glorious life peculiar to the Saints And if it be distinguished how Or if it be the same in kinde why Regeneration Union with Iesus Christ by faith the Effectual Working of the grace of God and a through Renovation is requisite to the enjoyning of that in some greater measure which all have Naturally in some measure 8. He saith this measure of the divine and glorious life is a seed But whereof Is it the seed of the Eternal weight of glory that the Saints live in the hope of Wherever that seed is it cometh at length to the harvest of glory as the Scripture teacheth us and if this seed be sowne in all all shall at length be saved If it be not the seed of Glory whereof I pray is it the seed Is it the seed of Grace This seed abideth 1 Ioh. 3 9. and is incorruptible and is by the Word of God even that Word of God which is preached by the gospel 1 Pet. 1 23 25. So that this seed is no common thing but peculiar to such as are borne againe who by Christ do believe in God who raised him up from the dead and who have purified their souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit 1 Pet. 1 21 22. 9. He saith this seed inviteth and inclineth all men to good But doth it invite and incline the Iaponians Braâ—ilians Artigovanteans and such Heathens who never heard of Christ nor had any shew of Religion to faith in Christ Or even to all that is enjoyned by the Law of Nature or the Law of the two Tables How cometh it then that Paul who was far better versed in the Law than Heathens are saith he would not have known concupiscence unless the Law had said thou shall not covet And how can this consist with the sinful state of every natural person whose thoughts and imaginations incline and invite to evil Read Rom 3 10 to 20. All are under sin vers 9. all have sinned and come short of the glory of God vers 23. Nay how can this be seing the carnal minde is enmity against God and is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be Rom 8 7 Is not the heart of every man by nature deceitful above all things and desperatly wicked Ier. 17 9. is not their very minde and conscience defiled Tit. 1 15. Where then can this good seed lodge It lodgeth neither in Heart Minde nor Conscience And shall it lodge in the Flesh It is true there is left in every Man a bit of a Natural Conscience informing concerning some Natural good requisite for self-preservation and for the preservation of Societies and inclineing thereunto but what is this to that Spiritual good required now by the Gospel and discovered by its Light Alas I see the hieght of the Quakers divinity is what a Natural Conscience can teach a Man-eater and this is their Gospel and this is their divine and glorious life O poor wretches 10. This seed he calleth the Vehicle of God A wonderful expression savouring more of a distracted braine and of an audacious blasphemous spirit than of a sober Christian fearing God 11. He calleth it the Spiritual body of Christ But by what Scripture I know not Christ is called the Saviour of the body Ephes. 1 23. Is Christ the Saviour of this seed The spiritual and mystical body of Christ is the Church Ephes 4 4. 1 Cor. 10.17 12 12 13 20. Rom. 12 4 5. Col. 1 24. Ephes. 2 23. Râ—m 12 27. Ephes. 3 6. 4 12 16. Col. 1 18. 2 19 What are the members of this body the body is not one member but many 1 Cor. 12.14 12. He saith it is the flesh and bloud of Christ that came out of heaven But had Christ no other flesh and blood than this Then the whole Incarnation of Christ is denyed And where is our Christian Religion then where is the Death of Christ where is his Resurrection where is his Ascension where is all the History of his life Is all that but dreames and lies whither will the Quakers lead us Christ gave his flesh for the life of the world Ioh. 6 51. did he give this seed for the life of the world was this seed a sacrifice to satisfie the justice of God what foolries be these Now the man in deed appeareth in his colours a Quaker in graine speaking non-sense at random and hereby evidencing what Spirit acteth him But one word more where readeth he that Christ's flesh and bloud came out of heaven They mean that Christ had the same Spiritual flesh and blood within his carnal flesh and blood which they have and so they are as much the Christ's of God as he was O dreadful blasphemy 13. He saith all the Saints eat of this What do only the saints eat of this while it is in every Man Every man by this mans doctrine is partaker of Christ's Spiritual body and hath Christ's flesh and bloud in him but they do not all eat thereof a strange phancy that persons have food in their belly before they eate it that persons are partakers of Christ's flesh and blood before they eat him by faith what wilde Notions be these Men are partakers of a glorious and divine life by having the spiritual body of Christ in them and the flesh and bloud of Christ that came out of heaven and that before they make any application of him to themselves by faith where read we of such things Christ tels us the contrary that except we eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood we have no life in us Ioh 6 53. and that with a doubled asseveration verily verily And he tels us moreover that he dwelleth in such as eate his flesh that is in beleevers vers 56. and not in others and vers 57. that he that eateth him even he shall live by him But these Impudent Quakers whose work is as it seemeth to câ—ntradict Christ and all the Gospel tell us that even
be justified from the imputation of anothers righteousness is both ridiculous and dangerous whence came that usual saying amongst many professours of Religion That God looks not upon them as they are in themselves but as they are in Christ. And Pag. 25 See Mr Hicks Pag. 51. c. Iustification 〈◊〉 not from the imputation of anothers Righteousness but from the actual performing and keeping of God's righteous statutes and Pag. 25 30. It is a great abomination to say God should condemne and punish his innocent Son that he having satisfiâ—d for our â—innes we might be justified by the imputation of his perfect Righteousness And againe I caution and warne men by no meanes to entertaine this principle of Christs dying to make satisfaction to divine Justice by whomsoever recommended And againe Pag. 26. He i. e. Christ fulfilled the Law only as our pattern or example And ib. Christ is so far from telling us of such a way of being justified as that he informes us the reason why he abode in his Fathers love was his obedience he is so far from telling us of being justified by vertue of his obedience imputed that unless we keep the commands and obey for our selves c. And P. 30. was not Abraham justified by â—orks we must not conceive as the dark imputation of this age that Abrahams personal offering was not a justifying righteousness Ib. p. 30. I do say Abraham had not the imputation of anothers righteousness to him his personal obedience was the ground of that just imputation And elsewhere Apol. p. 148. justification by the righteousness which Christ fulfilled for us in his own person wholly without us we boldly affirme to be a doctrine of Devils and an arm of the sea of corruption which doth now deluge the world This is suâ—ficiently plaine And Sand. found Pag. 30.31 I farther tell thee that Iustification by an imputed righteousness is both irrational irreligious ridiculous and dangeroâ—s and Pag. 27.29.30 Iustification goes not before but is consequential to the mortifying of lusts and the sanctification of the soul. More might be added but here is I suppose enough to discover how these Quakers homologate in the point of Justification with Papists Socinians and Arminians in denying the imputation of Christ's Righteousness in Iustification and substituting another ground or formal reason thereof even works done by us And how dangerous an errour this is undermineing the very cardinal point of Christianity every true Christian may know The Quakers in this are one with their Predecessours the old Anabaptists too 4. We come now to our Quaker and must see how he expresseth himself in this matter In his Thesis he saith who receive the illumination of this light that is as we evinced above the dim light of nature it that must be the Light or the Natural Conscience becometh in them a holy pure and spiritual birth produceing piety righteousness purity and other excellent fruites most acceptable to God This sure is a wonderful metamorphosis But how cometh it that this light is so much beholden to man in whom it is that if he do not resist it but receive its illumination religiously it will become a glorious and mighty powerful thing but if he do resist it and receive not its illumination it remaineth what it was Is this the Christian New birth and Regeneration whereof the Scripture speaketh Is this to be borne of the Spirit There is no infusion of any gracious principle or habite of grace and virtue here for the seed of all was in the man from his mothers womb and his kinde nature in receiving the illumination of this connatural light blew the coale and it became a burning fire warming the soul into all Christian vertues Is this Gospel doctrine or rather is it not Pelagian-quakerisme What followeth upon this By this holy birth saith he to wit Christ Iesus formed within a goodly title but it is but the Quakers Jesus that is blake Nature or the product of Corrupt nature produceing his works in us these sure are nothing but works of darkness as we are sanctified so are we justified in the sight of God Then Iustification and Sanctification â—tand upon one and the same ground and if there be any difference betwixt them Iustification must follow Sanctification Thus it is manifest how he homologateth with other Quakers and how they all agree with Papists in the doctrine of Iustification He addeth and one may wonder at the mans confidence and boldness according to the Apostles words but ye are washed but ye are sanctified in the name of the Lord Iesus and by the Spirit of our God But if either his sanctification or Iustification as now explained to us be either in the name of the Lord Iesus or by the Spirit of God I am far deceived Nay it is manifest that they are rather by the Power and Authority Vertue and Efficacy of Free will and the Natural Spirit of man receiving kindly the Illumination of that natural Light in every man and so transforming that natural thing to produce such works as by which the man is both Sanctified and justified Though this be the native sense and import of his words yet marke his effrontedness Therefore sayes he it is not done by our works produced by our will nor yet by good works considered by themselves What a shameless man is this to deny these works to be mans owne works which flow from a principle borne and brought into the world with him and not only so but actuated and transformed into a new pure and spiritual spring by the sole will of the man not resisting its light but receiving the same If these be not properly the mans owne works it is a great question if man have any works that can be called his owne But let it be so that they goe under the name of works done by a new infused principle and yet the Quakers are more Pelagian then the Iesuites and all the Papists for these acknowledge infused habites which Quakers know nothing of yet they may be called mans works and works produced by mans will to wit now regenerated and principled of new otherwise they are produced in man and mans will hath no elicite or imperat acts thereanent This is indeed Phanaticisme in folio But how can men be Sanctified or Iustified according to the Quakers by that which is none of theirs nor wrought by them Againe he must know that the Scripture excludeth all these holy works even produced by that new principle from being the ground or formal reason or ratio formalis objectiva of our Iustification as all our Divines shew writting against the Papists on this head And in this he giveth further evidence of his conspireing with Papists against the truth Finally I wish he had explained that to us nor by good works considered in themselves for it importeth that good works considered some other way possibly in conjunction with some other thing and what that