This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal licence. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Full documentation of the original data capture process is available from the Text Creation Partnership web site. All versions of the texts are now archived and freely available for download. See the TCP Download FAQ for detailed information. The TEI P5 versions are also freely available from the TCP Github repository.
A REPLY To a Pretended ANSWER, By a Nameless Author, TO VV. P's. KEY, In which the PRINCIPLES Of the People of God called QUAKERS Are further Explain'd and Confirm'd.
By William Penn.
LONDON, Printed for Thomas Northcott, in George-Yard in Lombardstreet, MDCXCV.
THO' I submit to Controversie as my Drudgery, not my Pleasure, otherwise than as it is my Duty, yet, I cannot but say, I am. Glad that the publick ConKey, clearing our Principles from vulgar ApReply than what is suitable to Christianity; whilst with great Levity and Prejudice, he will by no means allow us to be Christians.
My Reply will be short, but I hope clear and satisfactory; in order to which I shall observe this Method.
I. His Mistakes in Point of Fact, and the Ʋse he would make of them.
II. His Insinuations and Insincerity.
III. His Abusive Terms and Taunts upon us.
IV. His pretended Answers and Interpretations of Scripture. And,
Our Principles, so far as declared, and by Scripture defended in the Key, maintained against the Attempts of this Author, and further Explained and Confirmed for a Publick Good.
He begins his Answer with a Passage meerly personal, and not at all relative to the Nature of the Discourse, viz. about a Pamphlet, writ in Defence of the Bill for excluding the Duke of York, intituled, A few Words about the touchy Point of Succession: Teaching the Parliament, That when they had made first an Address to the Duke to relinquish his Right to the Crown; if he refused, then (but not before) they might not only Justly, but Civilly exclude him by an Act—When (says he) I had perused this Piece, without judging the Merits of the Cause, or the Wittiness of the Argument, I concluded that W. P. was
a Man principled for the Civil Liof his Country.
Answer, But if I may be so bold with this Author, Pray, why then Principl'd for Civil Liberties and not afterwards? and why this upon me at all? But why at this Time and upon this Occasion, of so differing a nature, to be brought in by Head and Shoulders, as the Proverb is? But what if I never writ such a Pamphlet? (as to be sure I did not) what's to be said to and of such an Aumy Circumstances? Let him know then. That I did not only never write such a Pamphlet, but I am sure this or that Man, but by a Good and Equal Constitution of Government, as some Papers by me, which I writ at that time, as well as divers Persons yet living, of good Reputation, can evi
But his next Paragraph explains the Matter, wherein he speaks thus: I could no otherwise reconcile the Folly of his Prevarications in the late Reign, than by imputing them to his intemperate Zeal for a boundless Liberty of Conscience (according to the Doctrine of K. James's Declaration).
In this he would be Charitable, but let him first be just. If there were no Prevarications, then there is no need of an intemperate Zeal for Liberty to shaIntemperance and Prevarications too, and that in all Reigns. And if it be possible, or worth while to reconcile him better to my Conduct, let him peruse my Great Case of Liberty
of Conscience, printed 1671. and my Letter to the Estates of Embden, 1672. and my Present State of England, 1675. and he will find I was the same Man then, and acted by the same Principles. Not more intemperate in the Reign that favoured it, than in the Reign I contendPersecutor, which I count a Beast of Prey, and a declared Enemy to Mankind, can without great InjuJames's Court: For I think I may say, without Vanity, upon this Provocation, I endeavoured at least to do some Good at my own Cost, and would have been glad to have done more: I am very sure I intended, and I think I did harm to none, neither Parmy own Family excepted; for which I doubt not this Author's Pardon, since he shews him
Page 8. Our Adversary misses again notoriously in Point of Fact, when he
Revenging my self upon J. Faldo and T. Hicks, for baffling of me 20 Years ago.
Answer, I had no Revenge in my Eye when I writ that Key; for 'twas writ in Pity, not in Anger; to inform and not to be revenged. I must beg my Reader to peruse it, who then can best judge if it tastes of that rank Spirit, and what Spirit this Man is of, that shews such Indignation at it; as well as see how meanly he has performed his Pretence of an Answer, that meddles not with the twentieth Part of it, tho of different Subjects.
It is not in my Nature to remember Injuries 20 Years ago, tho' this Man commits them unprovoked: Nor had I any Temptation to it, since I had all the Satisfaction I could desire but their Conversion. Concerning the first, I must refer my self to impartial Readers; and of the last the famous Barbican and Wheeler-street Publick Disputes, do give this Man the Lye. For at the last T. H. did not appear, and at the first he
Encomium he bestows upon them, with the poor Indian, that desired not to go to Heaven, if the cruSpaniard went thither, I must say, Let not my Soul go where their Souls are gone, if they did not heartily repent of their great Wickedness against the People of God called Quakers, and their Holy Profession, before they dyed.
Page. 9. He saith, The Light within is no Scripture Expression, and the Nation had called nothing the Light within, but the Effects of the perceptive Powers of our Minds, that is, our THOUGHTS.
Answer, By Nation he must either understand a Parliament or Synod, for I presume he has not spoke with all the Nation. But if the Common Prayer, established by Act of Parliament, have any share in the Sense of the Nation, or the Synod, or Assembly of Divines,
Westminster, he will find another Light owned by them, than Man's own Thoughts: Which bepag. 43. If the Light that is in thee be Darkness, how great is that Darkness—Take heed that the Light in thee be not Darkness.
I shall consider his abuse of Scripture in another Place, and shall say no more upon it at this Time, than that this Darkness being our Author's Light, he cannot comprehend the true Light; but with it opposes the true Light, and the Children of it. But that the Light within should not be a Scripture ExpresEnlightning but Light within? Can a Man's Mind be lighted and have no Light there? The Light is said to shine in our Hearts: Can that be, and not within? But more of this when I come to consider his Op
Page 15, 18, 19. Notwithstanding their empty Pretence, the Quakers learn their Religion not from the Light within, but from one another. They cannot name one that was a Quaker, that was not made so by hearing them, or reading their Books. That Quakerism is erected by Art, Method and Management; by Consults and Clubs; all subordinate to a General Assembly, and not from the sufficiency of any Principle in themselves either of Natural or Supernatural Donation.
Answer, This is also false in Fact, there being many that came in a good measure ripe to the Communion of that People, having for the most part the same Sentiment, as all did from their own Convictions by the same Principle, tho' mediately or ministerially. But if this Man had considered well, he would have spared this Absurdity, for who did the first Quaker hear? He will sureBeginning. However, I would have him know, No Man can see Divine Truth by another Man's Speakagainst themselves to their Temporal Wo and Eternal Destruction. That so much Sobriety, Patience, SelfTrick, Jugling, Legerdemain, on purpose to couzen the World and their own Souls; as this Author is pleased to render them. But to inform him a little better, if yet he needs it; those Clubs, as he is pleased to term them, that are subordinate to a General Assembly, are not Meetings to define and injoyn Faith or Ʋniformity of Worship, wherein ConPoor, of Fatherless and Widows, and that all walk up to the Holy Profession they make: Which, I hope, is no Argument against us, as if we embraced our Religion by Rote, and not by the Illuminations and Convictions of the Light and Spirit of Christ Jesus.
Page 52. And W. P. thinks it consistent with the Honour that is due to the Scripture to compare it with Roman Legends.
Answer, He would have done well to have cited the Place where I had done so ill. I must leave it to my Reader to do me justice against this gross Writer, who says one of the worst things withthat he is one Day to be judged for this Abuse.
I come to the Second Head of my Reply, viz.
Page 4. W. P. asserting in sundry Pieces, Liberty of Conscience, to be ex Jure Naturali, has destroyed all Morality, confounded Blessings and Curses, Good and Evil, somewhat worse than Hobbs himself; for he only asserts a Natural Liberty, but this a Divine Privilege to do Wickedness in the Name of the Lord.
Answer, He has not quoted any one Book, less the Place, where he makes me capable of being guilty of so danSaving to MoPeccavi. But to insinuate I writ for Liberty of Conscience, as a natural Right for those
Page. 6. He very weakly as well as unworthily insinuates, a near Relation betwixt me and the Jesuits. First, some one of the Society may have at one time or other had a Title-Page with the Words, Misrepresented and Represented in it, which makes up a part of mine, with which he is so angry; as if Title-Pages were Confessions of Faith, or that the same Words might not be used by Men of different Perswasions. It is to say, because Misrepresented may be misapplyed, therefore 'tis not to be used. Any man may be misrepresented, must be not therefore represent himself aright for fear of being a Jesuit? This, to be sure, gives a very ill Representa
In the next Place he says, W. P. Imping the Jesuit again, he represents his own Religion as like ours as may be,
by the new softning Method of Meaux.
Truly, I don't know what Religion he is of; for he has no more told us that, than his Name; but a Protestant, I suppose, at large: And yet I am reaSobriety and Charity in it. However, the Jesuits are much beholding to him, whatever I am, it being the first Time I have heard their Methods esteem'd so soft: Nor had they now had, I believe, that Complement from him, but to render us Jesuitical, or Popish at least.
Page 7. He adds, For W. P's Scheme is, first to give the Perversion of Quaand then to represent it in Equivocal Terms, after his own Way.
By which he would have the Reader think we are insincere as well as Mistaupon our selves, to cosen our selves as well as the World, in the great Business of SalvaMeaux's Copy, which was performed with much Address and Exactness.
He says, My Terms are Equivocal. I am sure I have mostly exprest my self in those of the Holy Scripture: 'Tis a sinp. 23, 41, &c. That he would have that little Piece of mine the Fruit of great Contrivance and Dep. 5. But that will depend upon the Conclusion, which will best shew how well he has acquitted himself.
Page 11, 12. He further insinuates, That we make the Light within the Rule, not only to direct our Belief and Practice of the Christian Religion, but to discover to Men the History of the Coming and Performances of Jesus of Nazareth, and that he is Christ the Lord; and this without the Help of the Scriptures.
Answer, Now this is very insincere on his part: For tho' the Light of the Eternal Word be without Doubt suffiHistorical, but of things immediate and practical, as of Sin, in Thought, Word and Deed, and to be daily assisted to live Soberly, Righteously and Godly in this World: To Pray and Preach, and Worship God; which relating to the Service of Jesus, and the Service of Jesus being by him allowChristian Religion, the asInsinuations and Innuendo's as this Author makes upon us.
Page 14. He would have his Reader believe, as if there were not one Passage in all my part of that Book called the
Christian Quaker, he can cite before it be corrected, both Style and Matter, because he only cites one which he thinks fit to correct; calling me for it a Lewd Author, and what else he pleases: But according to his usual Practice, he has incerted no Page to direct us where to find this Assertion. If to me he thought it not needful, I must tell him, His Amendment is as needless; for when I speak of Christ, I say He, and when of his Body, I say It: Not
Page 23. Since the Quakers will have their Light to be common to all Men, and not natural, there is no such thing in the Ʋniverse.
Answer, By which he insinuates, That a Divine Light cannot be communicated to every Man, and be Divine. Would he have shewn himself a candid Author, one that desired to have informed and
Compositum or Make; that is of the Nature of Man, as he is Man: By Divine, what is above Man, and from God, to direct Man in all well-pleasingness to him. Yet if by natural may be meant, that every Man that's born into the World has a Portion of this Light or Illuminating Principle to direct him in the Way to Blessedness, I should not very much quarrel at the Word, it being in a sort natural to all Men to have it, because all Men that are born (from whence the Word Nature springs) as certainly have it, as that they are born into the World. See John 1. 4, 19. 1 Cor. 12.
These few Instances I thought fit to give of the unjust Insinuations and Insinviz.
Indeed almost every Page is fraughted with them. My Key is a Picklock, and
Jesuits: Our WritApocryphal, our Phrases like Gypsie Gibbrish and Beggars Cant, our Arguments putid Sophisms, our LeadJuglers, Sophystical, of Suborned Sense: Men of Trick and Leger-de-main, abusing honest-meaning Men as Juglers do plain Country PeoRanting Cant, and that I debauch the Scriptures; with much more of this Strain and Style; besides that Scorn and Levity, which very much unbe
The first Perversion, mentioned in my Key is p. 1. viz.
The Quakers hold, That the Natural Light in the Con
Which, by the way, after the Flourish of an Answer to the Key (at least as to our Doctrine of the Light) is all that's cited by him, so that my Explanations of our Principle in answer to this, and three other Perversions upon this Do
Page 7. This is no Perversion unless an Objection made against a Tenet be a Perversion of a Tenet, which no Body thinks besides W. P. for we only say, That the Quakers believe that a Natural Light is supernatural and Saving: We mistake
not their Meaning, but oppose it as an Error.
Answer, He that changes the Terms of a Question abuses his Antagonist, and perverts the Argument, which is the Case: For the People call'd Quakers neNatural Light was Supernatural or sufficient to Salvation; and if Natural be not their Term, then it's a Perversion of their Principle. For whether they are mistaken in their PrinNatural in another Place, beCommon to all, or that All are Enlightned: But this begs the Question in Point of Argument, and will not rectifie or defend a Matter that is in Fact false: For besides that it is not fair in any to charge their ConsePerversion of what we say; and as such I give it in my Key. For as I said before, What any People deDivine be natural or no, shall be consiour Principle, but their PerKey, which he pretends to answer, he undertakes to state our Religion and Controversie beLewd, but Foul Way of treating any People or Opponent, in my Judgment; and I think I am not mistaken—his Words are these.
Page 8. If any thing they say deserves Consideration this is the Point; and of this they say, 1. That the Light within
is the Rule of the Christian Religion. 2. That it is God and Christ. 3. That Quakerism is taught them by it.
Answer, I could be glad this Author said any thing that deserved the ConsiKey, and then call it an Answer. It is not our way of Speaking to say the Light within is the Rule of the Christian Religion; but that the Light of Christ withFor in him was life, and that life the light of
men. Life in the word, light in men, and life too where it is obeyed, For Christ promises the light of life to all that follow Him, the True Light that enlightens every man that cometh into the
world. Christ himself hath made it the Rule of his Followers: But he that doth truth, cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest that they
are wrought in God. So that Christians are to square their Lives by the Light of Jesus, therefore it is their Rule. It is the Christian Path to BlesGod is light; that if we would have fellowship with God, we must walk in this light; and that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth those only that walk in this light; and that religion without it is a lye, 1 Jo. 1. To which let me add, That in his Book of Revelations, consonant thereunto, he saith, That the Nations of them that are saved shall walk in the Light (of the Lamb, Rev. 21. 23, 24.) The Apostle Paul makes it Universal and EfEphesians,
But all things that are reproved (or discovered) are made manifest by the light; for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Now All being reprovChristian's Armour; And let us put on the armour of light, says he, let us walk honestly as in the day, not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfil the Lusts thereof: Making it the same thing to put on the Armour of Light and to put on the Lord Jesus Christ; certainly then Christ must be that Light, and that Light must be Christ. But he objects to this Doctrine.
Page 11. The Christian Religion is nothing but the Service of Jesus of Naza—Nothing then can be the Rule of this Religion but what discovers to us that there is one Jesus of Nazareth, and that he is Christ the Lord. But never was any one man instructed by that Light that is in the Conscience of every Man, that there ever was such an one as Jesus of Namuch less that he was the Lord, and least of all what he required of his Servants, therefore no Light within, common to all Mankind, can be the Rule of the Christian Religion, since it was never possible for any Man to learn the least part of the Christian Religion by the Light that is in every Man's Conscience.
To the first Part of what he says, That the Christian Religion is nothing but the Service of Jesus of Nazareth, I shall easily agree: For the Service of Jesus of Nazareth is the Service of the God and Father of Jesus of Nazareth; and that is to fear God and keep his commandments; to love God above all, and
our neighbours as our selves; this is the whole duty of Man, Eccl. 12. 13. Matt. 22. 37, 39. That which Man has to do in the World for Salvation.
To the second Part of his Proposiviz. That nothing can be the Rule of this Religion but what discovers to us that there is one Jesus of Nazareth, and that he is Christ the Lord; I shall likewise agree upon Distinction. I distinguish then between an Historical and Spiritual Discovery of Jesus of Nazareth; and so of the Rule by which he and his Service are to be known. The Scriptures tell us of the Birth, Life, Ministry, Death, ResurJesus of Nazareth, and in brief of the Ministry and Sufferings of his blessed Followers and Apostles, and it must be acknowledged to be a great Mercy and Privilege to us, that we have them; but it cannot savin ceasing to do evil, and in denying all Ʋngodliness and the World's Lusts; and then in learning to do well, and living soberly, righteously and godlily in this present World. So that those that read the Scriptures of Truth, by which they have an historical Knowledge of the Coming of Christ, and so is a Rule to that Knowledge, as also to the Doctrines therein expresly declared, they must come to the Light of the Eternal Word to understand them, and, to see the Glory of the only begotten of the Father, as those of old beheld it, else the Scripture is as a sealed Book. Who knows God by reading of him, or Christ by reading of him, or Regeneration by reading of it, unless God is pleased by the Light of his Son, the true Key of David, to come in upon the Soul, and
viz. the New Creation, or the Regeneration of Man. Wherefore the Light or Spiviz. But never was any one Man Instructed by that Light that is in the Conscience of every Man, That there ever was such an one as Jesus of Nazareth, much less that he was the Lord, and least of all what he required of his Servants.
In this I must dissent from him, espeWord, from whence they came, and that answers to its own. This the Martyrs asserted, as Hooper, Bradford, Smith, Saunders,
Rogers, &c. also Calvin, Beza, Peter Martyr and Erasmus himthe Book of Martyrs, as also in the Wriordinarily reveal the History of Jesus Christ, who dare say it cannot do so? Is it not more reasonable to supMicha (Mich. 6. 8.) God hath shewn to thee, O man! what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Here is both Duty and the way to understand it. Now this Duty and Service is the Service of God, and so of Jesus of Nazareth, who came to teach Men so to do, viz. To do Justly, love Mercy, and walk humbly with God. The way to know and do this is God's illumination of Man. GOD HAS shewn unto thee, O Man! How does God shew Man? Whatsoever makes manifest is light, says the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians, Eph. 5. 13, 14. So that 'tis by the Light of the Word, by which he made all things, that he shews unto man all things necessary to Salvation, viz. What is good, and what he requires
of him: What Service, Homage and Obedience he expects. So that here we have both the Universality and SufRomans, Rom. 1. 19. For that which may be known of God is manifest in them, for God hath shewn it unto them. Which way, I pray, does God manifest the Knowledg of himself in Men, but by the Light of the blessed Word, by whom he made Man, and without whom nothing was made that is made: In him was life, and that life the light of men, and this is the true light that enlightens every man that cometh into the world, John 1. 4, 9.
Now that the Christian Religion is this Duty, Service and Knowledg of God, we may satisfie our selves, from that blessed Sermon of Blessings, preachMatth. 5. Blessed are the poor in spirit; blessed are they that mourn (for their Sins, and for want of feeling Peace with God;) blessed are the meek; blessed are they that
hunger and thirst after Righteousness; blessed are the Merciful; blessed are the Poor in Heart; blessed are the Peace-Makers; and blessed are they which are persecuted for Righteousness sake. If these States were blessed, and those unNazareth, tho' he was not then offered up, and that they knew not his History. Now that all have a Light to shew them the Happiness of these States, the Universal Testimony of all Ages and Nations assures us; and to deny it, is to say the Sun did never shine, since there was a Man in the World.
The same may be said of the rest of his excellent Sermon: As that we should seek God, in the first place, and trust Providence for the rest, and live by Faith in his Goodness: Be charitable and devout without ostentation: Not so much as Lust in the Mind, but speak Truth without an Oath; bear Abuses, forgive Enemies, be sparing of censuring others, and finally do, as well as hear the Word of God, and to
all Men as we would be done to. These excellent things, more naturally, and exGentiles, are yet to be found up and down in the account given us of their Lives and Doctrines by Strabo, Laertius, Herbert, Stanly, Cudworth, and my part of the Christian Quaker. By all which it may be seen, that the blessed Word, who did himself preach so plainly and fully, yet concisely, this admirable Doctrine, had enlightned those Gentiles with great Knowledge, and instructed them therein, and that, several hunJesus of Nazareth, will be allowed to be the Service of Jesus of Nazareth, or else noMinister among the Jews, and, in conclusion,
Offering for the World. For it is very possible that a Man may receive Benefit by a Medicine, of whose Composition he may be igno
Since then Humility, Mercy, PatiService of Jesus of Nazareth, since 'tis the Substance of what Jesus of Nazareth preached, and the End of the Labour, Travels and Writings of his blessed Apostles (and that these things were in a Measure in the World before the coming of Jesus of Nazareth in the Flesh, and that even those that knew him and received him when he did come were those that walked up to the Light
Light with which the Word-God enlightned Men, was a Divine, Spiritual and Saving Light, because it revealed these Truths to Gentiles as well as Jews, that had an immediate TenNazareth, as they thereby served the God and Father of Jesus of Nazareth; for says Christ himself, He that doth the Will of my Father, the same is my Mother, my Brethren and my Sisters.
To sum up this, once more, I say, We never said the Light within is given to all Mankind, to reveal Facts done, or historical Accounts of Persons and Actions, tho' we cannot say it is not able to do it, but ordinarily the Nature of Things, as to Truth and Falshood,
Obligation and Duty, Commission and Omission; and therefore we say, that tho' all did not foresee the Coming of Christ, with the Circumstances that attended him, as some of the Prophets did, That, being an extraordinary Manifestation of this Light, yet all had the ordinary Manifestation of it, to do justly, love Mercy and walk humbly with the Lord: And so they have now, tho' they have not the extraordinary Revelation of the History of Jesus of Nazareth; in which respect we confess the Scriptures to be a Secondary Rule, an Historical Rule, and a Rule of the Form of Sound Words in Doctrinal Truths: But the First and great Rule is the Light and Spirit of God, as that was the Rule to them, by whom the Scriptures were given forth, in their giving them forth: And we also affirm, The Light and Spito be that of the only begotten of the the Father, full of Grace and full of Truth.
If he object, If all had this Light, why did not all know him, as indeed that is the Weight of his Objection, and other Adversaries Oppositions.
I answer, All have Reason, but all are not Reasonable; all don't use it: So all have Light, but all don't obey it. It is not the Light's Insufficiency, but Man's Disobedience, that renders him uncapable of the Knowledge of DiIf you do my Will, you shall know of my Doctrine, whether it be of God or no. Obeying the Convictions and first MoNazareth, and necessary to be bepage 12, 13. But I shall at
Page 13. They affirm the Light within is Christ; and I say then it is nothing else but Jesus of Nazareth. If they make the Light within to be Christ, and not Jesus of Nazareth, they make it Antichrist; and because they worship God in this Appearance (as they speak) they are Antichri
Answer, This way of Arguing is very dark as well as injurious. If by Jesus of Nazareth he only means what he took of the Virgin Mary, and will not consider him as the Eternal Word; But as Man, like to us in all things, Sin excepted, He is not the Light within, that we declare of and worship God in.
But this Author at the same time deJohn calls him, Joh. 1. 4, 9. but he calls himself so, John 8. 12.
This Antagonist seems too eager and rash, or he would have reflected better upon the Way of the Holy Ghost's speaking in Scripture; for someAbraham he is not God over all, blessed for ever, he is not the eternal Word, in whom is Life, and that Life the Light of Men. And as he hungred, thirsted, sorrowed, wept, dyed, he was not the Divine Light, that lighteth every Man that cometh into the World: Yet is alternatively called Christ, sometimes Christ without man,
in Man, the Hope of his Glory; according to the double ReJesus of Nazareth to be Christ the Lord, because he asserted him the Light of the World, and as such to be in Man: Whereas they who consider him but in one Capacity, are too strict with the Text, to wring us, and so in the end draw the Reflection upon themselves. But to run this Abuse of the Holy Ghost, as well as us, so high, as there
But that he may apply this Injustice home, he is pleased that it should light upon me, and therefore he quotes a Passage out of my part of the Christian Quaker, tho' not the Page. I wave the Scurrility of his Introduction to it,
page 14, 15. This is the Passage, as he gives it. The Power, Life and Light which inhabited that Holy Person, which (or who) was born at
Bethlehem, was and is chiefly and eminentBy which (says he) he makes the Light within to be their Christ, and Jesus of Nazareth the prepared Instrument of this Christ.
Now by this the Reader will have a clear Taste of the Justice of this Wri
My Words are thus laid down by me (Chr. Qu. p. 104. chap. 21.) We confess that though the Eternal Pow
By which it is plain with what unfairness he gave my Words before: First he left out my Quotation out of Nazareth, was and is chiefly and emiHos. 13. 4. for there is no Saviour besides me, saith God (this he left out) yet that it vvas instrumentally a Saviour, as prepared and chosen for the Work which
Heb. 10. 5, 6. Lo I come, in the volume of the Book it is written of me, to do thy will O God! a body thou hast prepared me.
Hosea, For there is no Saviour besides me, saith God; whereby it appears that the Eternal Power, Life and Light was eminently concerned in Man's Salvation. Secondly, he concealed that Scripture in the Conclusion of the Paragraph, out of the Hebrews, A body hast thou prepared me, &c. which plainly interPerson, and by which, and it; that he is pleased to change for who, and He and Him, to render me at once Absurd and ErroneLewd Author, and all to naught. This was done of Malice, doubtless, the betJesus of Nazareth, and Christ and him that was born of the Virgin Mary; reading It, He and Him, which referred to the Body; so making me to intend Jesus of Nazareth, compleatly considered, when I plainly intended, from the Nature of the Words of the text, and those Words, and the Scripture citBody of Christ Jesus of Nazareth.
Thus much of his Construction of the Words he quotes out of the Christian Quaker, before recited: But if he will alDivide or Distinguish between Christ and Jesus of Nazareth. Nor
Nazareth is Christ's Instrument to appear in and by, for man's Salvation; but that the Word took Flesh, and this is the Christ or Anointed of God; And tho sometimes the Term Christ is given to the Word, sometimes to the prepared Body he took, as when he is said to dye, and be buried, and raised again, &c. yet God manifest in the Flesh, and Immanuel, God with us, in our Nature, is that Christ of God, or Christ the Lord, that God hath and will exalt; the Enlightener, Redeemer, Saviour of the World: Both an Offering for all, and the Mediator, and Sanctifier of all that desire to come to God by him.
But he further urges against us and our Doctrine of the Light within, as what is Fallacious on our part, to draw in Proselytes, and which he terms a putid Sophism, p. 21, 22. viz. Is there not a Light in every Man's Conscience? You experience one in your own. And is God Light? and Christ Light? and is not God within, and Christ within? Now this is all very true: But when from hence
they infer, God is the Light within, it is a putid Sophism. God being Light, and being within Men, proves not that God is a Light within Men. God is Light, and God is within other things as well as Men: Is then God a Light within to every Tree, every Beast, every Star? If this be absurd, then God's being Light, and being within, proves but sophistically that he is the Light within: And yet this is the constant Method the Quakers use to teach their People the Divinity of the Light within.
Answer, I hope he will find no cause to blame me for Imperfect, and less for Perverted Quotations: I cite him fairly and fully. Now, for Answer, I say, I never saw or heard of that way of Reasoning or Tampering, as he styles it, that he charges upon us to make Proselytes by. And I think I ought to be at least as well versed in our Way and Writings as himself. All reasonable PeoJohn, and that of his first Epistle also. And it is granted by this Man, that God is in Men, and that God is Light, but will not have it that God is a Light within Men. Indeed his Argument does not prove it, for it is not regularly formSophism, or Sophistical in us, nor is the Reason good that he gives against it, viz. Because it is absurd to say, that God is a Light within Trees Beasts and Stars, in that God is within them, and God is Light; thereTrees Beasts and Stars &c. are not of Mans Nature and Capacia Light then to Man, I cannot compreIlluminator and Instructor to his well being. The Scriptures already cited sufficiently prove that God is Light, and Christ is Light, and that all Men are Enlightned by him: And to be sure it must be with his own Light. Now tho', with a fair Adversary, one might say without offence, that God or Christ is
Light within Man, yet it is not the common way of our Expressing our Selves.
To be sure we have no such meaning in that way of Speaking, as some Adlighted Man, and by the Light of Christ in Man, Man comes to know God and Christ: And that the Light in Man is the Light of God or of Christ, and not that God or Christ is the Light in Man. The Light in a Room at Noon Day is the Light of the Sun, but the Sun cannot so properly be said to be in the Room, because its Light is there; for the glorious unapprochable Body of it is else where. I hope this will not pass with the Sober Reader for a Putid Sophism.
He farther says, p. 24. I may not now adays, therefore, tell Quakers their own Religion is false, without telling
them what is the Truth; lest I should Tempt them to leave Quakerism for Imand not for the Service of Jesus Christ.
Answ. We are beholding to him that he thinks our Religion a Bar to Impiety and Irreligion; and, I wish neither had appeared in his opposing of it. The Truth he has a mind to tell us, lyeth in a few Words, upon which he bestows no less then fifteen Pages, (viz.) That the Light which God hath given to Man for Salvation, generally speaking, is beThe Quakers Belief and Assertion is,
Of all which he takes this imperfect notice, That Christ, who is the Word, that was with God and was God (John 1. 4, 9. and is so for ever) hath enlightned every Man that cometh into the World, with his own Light; as he is that true Light, or such a Light, as there is no other to be compared to him: Which is the meaning of the Emphasis True in the Text. And that such as follow the Reproofs, Conshall not walk in Darkness: That is in Evil and Ignorance of God; but, shall have the Light of Life: That is be in a Holy and Living State or ConA state of Acceptance and Salvation, which is from Sin as well as from Wrath: (see Isa. 49. 6. John 1. 4, 9. c. 3. 21. c. 5. 40. c. 8. 12. c. 10. 10) And for which End Christ was given of God. So that they assert the Light of Christ, to be sufficient to save; that is, to convince of Sin, lead out of it, and quicken the Soul in the Ways of HoNatural Light, otherwise than as all Men, born inNatural to all Men, because all Men have it. For this Light is something else than the bare Understanding Man hath as a rational Creature: For as such, Man cannot be a Light to himself; but has only a Capacity of seeing, by means of the
Light with which Christ the Word enlightneth him. For we can no more be a Mental or Intellectual Light to our selves, than we are an External and Corporeal Light to our selves: But as the Sun in the Firmament is the Light of our Bodies, so the Light of the Divine Word is the Sun of our Souls; the glorious Luminary of the Intellectual World; and they that walk in it will, by It, be lead to BlessedRev. 21. 24.The Concurrance of many causes being requisite to produce Faith; the Quakers confound these Inspirations with the Light, and attribute the efficiency of one cause to another, which must needs Pervert all sound Judgment of things, and make them speak inconsistences: As when W. P. says, Man canas if the denial of the Devinity of the Light within implyed any such thing; and Man has onas if the Defect was in Gods Works in nature and in the Scripture, and not in Mans seeing faculty.
Now such Expressions shew his apprehensions are much Perverted about these things.
Answ. But this shews my Opponent to be either shallow, or worse. I would be so Charitable as to think he mistakes me, and in the conclusion abused himself. For why do the Quakers confound those Inspirations with the Light? We neLight from descerning and distinction: Spirit from Life and Power: Word, as it speaks forth Gods Mind to Man: Truth, in the inward Parts, as it deals truly with Man, and would redeem him from lyGrace as it is God's Gift, and not Mans Understanding, or Mans Merit. I shall not therefore quarthe Sun Generates all Life,
and its Faculties in Bodies, but not by its Light; for we never said it did, with reference to the Light within: Else all Men would have Divine Life as well as Light, which was never our asserviz. John 1. 4. In him, the word, is Life, and that Life the Light of Men, not the Life of Men; but as they obey it: According to that clear and full Expression of our Blessed Lord, John. 8. 12. I am the Light of the World, he that followeth me shall not walk in Darkness, but shall have the Light of Life; that is, Life as well as Light. They that read him will see who keeps nearest to the Text, and who walks closest to the Rule and form of sound Words; which we hope neither he nor any of his a betters shall ever be able to draw or drive us from.
For the use he makes of those words of mine; And Man has only a Capacity to see, (viz.) As if the defect was in God's Works in Nature and in the Scriptures,
and not in Man's seeing Faculties; he utterly mistakes me: I will not say wilfully; but upon that he makes a great Pudder, and depends the strength of his Conclusion: For I speak of Man in his Creation, and he of Man in his Fall. The Conclusion cannot be right that is drawn from wrong Premises, and I hope he when he thinks again will think so too; and that his Pains, p. 36. 37. might have been spared. For I hope he will not think there was any defect in Paradice, as there must have been if Man had been defective in his seeing faculty; for even there he was but Man, and, as such, he could not be his own Light; which is plain, in that when he Erred, he Erred from something else than himself, him
Man then, had only the Capacity of Seeing all Divine Objects; as Truth, Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy, Justice,
&c. which were only discernible by the inshinings of this Divine Light of the Word of God. And since he alludes so strictly in his Instances from the Crea&c. are sensibly wrought in Men by this Divine PrinciDogma's p. 37, 38, 39. as that Man is not sensible of the Divine Agency or
John, that he that over
And very sorry I am for this opposer, that he allows Man no spiritual Senses, or that which answers to our outward Senses; and if he does, surely they are
p. 37. But this I may say, that neither is the illuminating, or renewing, or regenerating, or any other Divine Inspiration, immediately perceptible to any Sense, inward or outward, in Humane Nature; and if so, 'tis certain, none of these can be a Light within us. But why it is not so, he has not told us, he can
That there is another Light and Spieffects of the Perceptive Faculties of their own Minds, as this Man calls it, I urge that passage in Genesis, 6. 3. My Spirit shall not always strive with Men. Aplain Proof that God strove with the Old World by his holy Spirit, which could not be if they had it not, or were unsensiNehemiah 9. 20. It is said, That God gave them his good
Spirit, but they rebelled against it, thereDavid prays that God would not take his Holy Spirit from him, which shews it was with him, and that not as a Prophet, but ormeasure of it to be given to all to profit with, as the Apostle speaks, 1 Cor. 12. 7. Else he could not have said, And take not thy Holy Spirit from me; as much as to say, for if thou dost utterly deprive me of it, I shall grow Dark, Hard and Impenitent, and be undone for ever.
The Lord by the Prophet Isaiah, proves, That his Spirit should succesAnd for me, this is my Covenant with them, saith the Lord, my Spirit that is upon thee, (Christ) and my words which
I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy Seed, nor out of the mouth of thy Seeds Seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever, Ch. 59. 21. And, I pray, who are Christ's Seed, and Of
Thus the Prophet, Chap. 44. 3. I will pour water upon him that is Thirsty, and floods upon the dry Ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy Seed, and my Blessing upon their Offspring. A most ample and close Proof to my Point, That God gives his Spirit to Men, and that there is something more than the Light of reading and hearing of Men and Books, or the Perceptive faculty of the Mind to instruct Men. And that, not only in extraordinary cases, and on singular and eminent occasions, which our Opponent allows, as to Moses, the Prophets and Apostles, but ordinarily, commonly, suc
The Prophet Joel is yet more comAnd it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all Flesh; Young and Old, Hand-Maids and Servants: No Age, no Sex, no Degree shall be exempted. The Apostle Peter applyed this very Text to the Dawning of the Primitive Christian Days, as then begun to be acActs 2. 17. Not that that which befel the Apostles and Disciples of Jesus in that Time, was the compleat answerall Flesh. Besides, the very same ApoFourteen several Nations, That the Promise was to them and to their Children, and to all that were afar off, whom the Lord should call; so that the Gifts of the Spirit were the Fulfilling of the Gospel▪Promise, and consequently the great Gospel-Privilege and Qualifica
The Apostle Paul tells us, Rom. 8. That there is an absolute Necessity that People should have the Spirit of God dwelling in them, and that they should be led and conducted by it, or they canThere is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit. Here it is the Christian Rule.
Again, ver. 12. But if the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead DWELL IN YOU, he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies, by his spirit, that dwelleth in you: So that the Indwellings of the Spirit did quicken and comfort the ancient Christians, and was Apostolical Doctrine.
Again, verse 14, 15, 16. For as many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the sons of God; which they cannot be if they have it not: For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba Father. The Spirit it self
Notices God has given to all, of his Thoughts and Mind by Creation and Scripture. But alas! too apparent it is that this Man knows little of the Workings of God's Spirit, that so unspiritually speaks of it. Did not our blessed Lord say, John 3. 5. That unless Man be born of the Spirit, he could not enter into the Kingdom of God? Was this only for the Primitive Times? Then Men ever since Men have not been savable, for they have wanted the Means of SalvaREGENERATION. And if Regeneration be necessary to all, how can a Man be rationally said to be born of the Spirit, and not to have the Spirit he is born of; or be (as Peter phraseth it) a Partaker of the DIVINE
Nature, 2 Pet. 1. 4. But more than this, Christ told his Disciples, That the Spirit of Truth he would send them, though it should be a Comforter to them that believed in him, and followReprove the World of Sin; which could not be, if the World had not such a Measure of the Spirit, as to reprove them in their Evil-doing. And indeed all that will be serious and reflect, must confess, from Experience, they have enough of it to re
Memorable is that second Chapter of the Apostle, in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, a worldly-wise People, whose Faculties were as perceptive as our Opponents, I doubt not, concerning the Office, Efficacy and Necessity of the Holy Spirit, to know God and our Du
And what has been said of the Holy Spirit, may be said of the Divine Light: As one of the earliest Books in Scripture
Job 24. 13. They are of those, says Job, speaking of the Wicked, that rebel against the Light. Then they had it: And if They had it, all had it; For to be sure the Righteous were not without it.
Again, The Spirit of Man is the Candle of the Lord; Prov. 20. 27. but it must be lighted by that Light we speak of, or it is a dark Candle. Now God lights the Candle of the Wicked, much more is he the Light of the Candle of the Righ
Again, he says, How often is the Candle of the Wicked put out: Job 21. 17. Prov. 13. 9. Which shews it is often lighted; and if They have the Light, the Righteous, to be sure, are not without it: For, The Way of the Just is a shining Light, which shines more and more to the perfect Day. Obedience to Light received encreases Light. Now if the Way of the Just be a shining Light, to be sure the Light is saving, or is the Way to Salvation: And so the beloved Disciple has it, Rev. 21. The Nations of them that are saved shall walk in the Light.
David says also, in Proof of our Point, The Lord is my Light and my Salvation, Ps. 27. 1. Then he had an higher and clearer Light than his own perceptive Faculties.
Again, Thy Word is a Light to my Feet, and a Lanthorn to my Paths, Ps. 119. 105. Which was an Inward and Spiritual Word, for it was such an one as he could find in his Heart, according to Moses, Deut. 3. and the Apostle, Rom. 10.
David also, Ps. 42. prayed that the Lord would send forth his Light and his Truth, which were the same thing, that it might lead and bring People to his Holy Hill and Tabernacle. This was more than Man, or what was of Man's Con
Moreover, God declared by the ProIsaiah, That he had given Christ for a Light to lighten the Gentiles; which was more than Man's Wit or UnderDoctrine, Miracles and Example, yet he was and is a Light
John 1. 4, 9. with many more, before observed. And this Light and Spirit are of the same Principle, or the same PrinJohn 16. 7. with Eph. 5. 13. For the first makes it the Office of the Spirit to convince the World of Sin, and the latter place tells us, That whatever is reproved is made manifest by the Light: And the Apobecause, says he, whatever makes manifest is Light: An Assertion that can never be denied. And as true it is that it must be a Divine Light, that reveals Divine Truths. And because it is necessary that all should know them for their Salvation, since God would have all come to the Knowledge of the Truth, and be saved, the Consequence must be good, That all have this Divine Light, more or
I might proceed to enumerate ScriProphets, Evangelists and Epistles; but I think what I have said is a double Portion: And therefore I recommend it to the candid Reader's serious Perusal and Observa
I come next to consider his Cavils against our Citations of Scripture, and indeed against the Scripture it self, which will not be hard to e
Page 41. He is angry, I say, that Christ has enlightned Men with his own Light; calls this very hard Names, and says 'tis the Quakers Apocrypha: But we abide by it; and are taught so to do by the Scriptures, that he would have the World believe we deny and make Apocryphal. John 1. 4. In him (Christ) was Life, and the Life the Light of Men.
own Light, let me be blamed: If it be, how pre
The next Scripture is that in Prov. 20. 27. The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the Belly: That is, says he, the Spirit of Man, which God hath made, hath in its Nature a Consciousness of all his Thoughts, Purposes and Counsels within him. But this Word Consciousness supposes a Knowledge, together with some thing else, that gives us that Knowledge: It is the very import of the Words: And what is that, but that Divine Light which gives Light to the Candle: For a Candle cannot Light it self, and by the Repetition of Sin, is said to be often blowed out. For tho' it cannot blow that Light out, it blows out its Enlightnings. Thus Sin quenches the Spirit; that is, the enlivenings and
Thus he abuses us and that Passage of our Saviour Christ, If the Light that is in you be Darkness, how great is that Darkness? As if Christ meant any Light but that of Man's Mistake and Presumption, or that we could assert God to be that Light in us, which Christ said might be Darkness: For this Man says, If the Light in us here men
The use I make of that Scripture, 2 Cor. 4. 6. God that commanded the Light to shine out of Darkness, had shined in their Hearts, to give the Light of the Knowledge of the Glory of God, in
the Face of Jesus Christ, was thus; That God had lighted the Hearts of men, by breaking through the Darkness there, with his Divine Light. This Author, p. 43. limits this Light to the Apostles and Fellow-Labourers; and all the rest are to see with their Eyes, and without that Divine Light in themselves: In fine, to be concluded by their Authority and not their own Conviction; for what he says centers there. Whereas the Ato turn people from the darkness (that was in themselves) to the light that had shin'd there uncomprehended. Also to be made manifest in their Preaching to the Consciences of People; which could not be in Divine Truths without a Divine Light. I must leave this way of our Opponent's treating of Scripture to my Reader's Consideration.
Pag. 45 to 57. His next Abuse is, that of John 1. 9. about which he beRoom for Reason, being no less than twelve Pages. He that can make more of them than these Three follow
1. That the Life that is come by Christ is that we shall out-live the Grave; not that the Soul is made Spiritually alive to God, while in this World, by Divine Quicknings, to the Use of her Spiritual Sensations, that Sin had taken away, by bringing her under a SpiJohn 8. 12. That they that follow him should have the light of life; and, John 6. unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you: (Which implies an Inward and Living State of the Mind towards God on this Side the Grave) I must also leave with my ConReader, that has any Relish or Taste of Divine Things.
2. The Second thing he objects upon our Use of this Scripture (John 1. 9.) is our making Coming into the World to refer to Man, and not to Christ; which, says he, is first a Redundancy of Speech, and next dangerous; for it is as if a Man
came from an other World into this. Now I would have this Critick know, if he can be ignorant of it, That divers Learn'd Protestant Commentators have taFathers, and all the Translators that I can compass, be it into the Latin Versions, or our Vulgar European Tongues; as my Reader may please to see at large, in a Book of mine, called, The Spirit of Truth Vindicated, from p. 52. to p. 62. so that he must allow we are in good Company, if mistaken; since so many Criticks and Commentators are with us; as Singular and Erroneous as he is pleas'd to represent us. But where is the Redundancy? Why, it is, that every Man would have serv'd without the Words coming into the World, which follow them. No Wonder he is so churJob, us'd in the Liturgy, in the OfMan that is born of a Woman, &c. for according to this CriMan had been enough, and the Addition, That is born of a Woman, dangerous; for that it implies there are Men that are not born of WoEnlightens him, as well as made him; and that the first Ten Verses of that Chapter refer to his Divinity: What he was in himself, and what he was and is to Man, as the Word-God, by whom the whole World was made, and Man, in an excellent manner, Enlightned, and this before any Mention is made of his Taking Flesh, or coming of the Seed of Abraham.
Lighteth, limited to Christ's Coming in the Flesh, and that all were enlightned then by him: Now, I will not say, he was not a gloriMinistry and Miracles, in his Life and Sufferings; for if his DisLights of the World, doubtless it may be better said of him, their Lord and Original, That he was the Light of the World. But this hinVirgin Mary; in whose Steps this Man seems to tread. If he will read from Page 62 to P. 86. and the ReaJohn, wholly relates to the
Word before he took Flesh, and as he is the immediate Enlightner of the Souls of Men. In him was Life, and the Life the Light of Men, Verse 4. This was neither Sun, Moon, nor Stars; nor yet the Effect of the Perceptive Faculties of our Souls, nor yet any Outward and Mi
Page 52, 53. As for the gross AbsurBe-Godded and Be-Christed, according to our Principle, he has shewn sufficiDivine Kindred and Membership, through true Christening, which is the Anoynting, 1 Joh. 2. 20, 27. we shall not shrink from the Word, because of his Out-crys at us for it. I have alPage 54, 55, 56. That to himself, doubtless, looks very adroit and determining, viz. That we are not enlightned by what God is, but what God does. This is upon my saying, That God enlightens Men with his own Light; calling me all to naught for that Phrase, as Unscriptural, and of a meditated Temperament, to amuse my Readers with: Rendring the Light, which we say true Christians ought to walk by, to be no otherwise God's own Light, than the Sun and the Rain are his own Sun and Rain: Not of his Nature, but of his Creation only; that I take to be his meaning, a little plainer than he has exprest it. To which I reply, in that famous and suitJo. 1. 5, 6, 7. This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, That God is Light, and in him is no Darkness at all; if we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lye and do not the truth: But if
we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin. Here I leave him to consider of this Light; whether it be a Created One: Such an one, as is not what God is, but what God does; and shall attend his Perversion of my present Use, and our common Sense of several Scriptures, cited in Favour of our Inward Principle: And then shall conclude my Reply to his pretended Answer, to that part of my Key, which relates to the Light-within.
That I may make the Point plainer to the Reader, I shall first lay down the Perversion mention'd in my Key, then our Principle upon it, with those Scriptures, he takes Occasion to twist and turn from our true Sense and End in citing them, and of which he is so conscious to himself, that to anticipate my Reply, he gives it for me, as I shall anon observe, and not a great way from our true Sense.
Pervers. The Quakers hold, That the Light within them is God, Christ and the Holy Spirit; so that every Quaker has whole God, Christ and Holy Spirit in him; which is gross Blasphemy. Key, P. 2. 3.
By this my Reader will see what we except against, viz. the Blasphemy of making every Quaker comprehend whole God and Christ, and Holy Spirit in him. Now I must desire him to observe what our Principle says to this Suggestion.
Principle,
This is also a Mistake of their Belief: They never said, That every
Divine Illumination or Manifestation of Christ, in the Hearts of Men, was whole God, Christ or the Spirit; whereby to be guilty of that Gross and Blaspheemous Absurdity, some would fasten upon them: But that God, who is Light, or the Word-Christ, who is Light, the Quickening Spirit, and God over-all, blessed for ever, hath enligtened Mankind with a Meawhole Sun or Air is in every House or Chamber. There are no such harsh and unscriptural Words in their Writings: It is only a frightful Perversion of some of their Enemies, to bring a Scandal upon their Holy Faith. Yet, in a Sense, the Scriptures say it, and that is their (the Quakers) Sense, in which they only say the same thing. He that is with you shall be in you: I will not leave you Comfortless, I will come to you: I in them and they in us: Christ in us, the Hope of Glory: Ʋnless Christ be in you ye are Reprobates. Little Children, of whom I travel in Birth again, until Christ be formed in you.
This is my Explanation of our Principle, about the Light, from the Perversions of our Adversaries: By which the uncandid Dealing of this Man must be very obvious; since, besides his Silence, and that he seems to shut his Eyes to our Explanation and Vindication of what we hold, from what he charges, he
doubts the Perversions, by Changing and Misgiving the End for which the Scriwhole God and Christ to be in every Man, or to be so in any Man: But that God, Christ and Spirit were in some near manner in the People of God. For the very Perversion runs it no farther than the People call'd Quakers; that every one of us are sug
Hear him, Page 58. Christ says not here, that any Man, except his Disciples, shall have him in them; that Christ is in none but those that are in him; that he is not in Reprobates, so not in every Man; that he was not in the Galatians; that they
must be new Creatures that have him; so all against W. P.'s Purpose. But what was my Purpose, I pray? Hear the Key again.
Yet,
What Fair or Wise Adversary would have been guilty of so ill a thing, and so easily to be detected? Is any thing plainer than, first, That in a Sense, the Scriptures say it, and that is their (the Quakers) Sense, in which they only say the same thing.every Quaker, and not every Man is in the Perversion? Secondly, That I deny, in the Name of that People, any such Blasphemous PrinQuaker has whole God in him, but much the contrary; exa Sense: What Sense do I say it? Why, the Sense in which the Scriptures say it.
Now, Reader, judge thou, and not I, what to call this Man, that with so much Falshood obtrudes upon us the unQuakers. And to shew him to himself yet more plainly, he has provided me with the means of doing of it, which I toucht upon before, viz. That the Quakers use to say, None but Believers have Christ in Ʋnion, but all others have Christ in them. Which at least gives away the Point: For if Christ be in some Sense or other in every Man, yet he is not said by me to be in the foregoing Scriptures, in any but Believers. And he makes too bold with us also, in saying, in our Name, That Christ is in all Men; for we chuse rather to express our selves other ways, as, That a Manifestation of Christ is in every Man, or that Christ lighteth every Man, or that the Light of Christ is within every Man; and in so saying, I have, by many plain Scriptures prov'd, That we speak but the Truth, and that which is every Man's Blessing: And it were well all would prize it, and live up to it. For that is the Gift of God to Men for their Salvation, and the ConVisitation. And tho' Tradition, Form and Formality, in many Countries, as well as WickedLight, since all that is reprov'd is made manifest by the Light, Eph. 5. 13. But before I close this SubPage 58, 59.
He says this Passage of the Apostles, Christ in us, the Hope of Glory, is against me, because it was only to Believers that he wrote. Grant it, yet why may not Christ be a Condemner in the Consciences of the Wicked, as well as the Hope of GloPenmen, and here and there an extraordinary Person, that has had the Power of Miracles, to Confirm the Truth of his Inspiration: For if he has given us his Son, how much more with him shall he give us all things? So that our Adversary has herein granted what he has so often denyed and op
The like in that Passage of the Apostle to the Corinthians, 2 Cor 13. 15. Ʋnless Christ be in you, you are Reprobates. This, says he, proves, no Reprobates have Christ in them; How then is Christ in every Man, if he be in none of these? But then say I, he is in all but Reprobates by this Man's Concession: And we can say no more. For if by Reprobates we are to understand a Judas State; a seared Concrucified to himself afresh the Lord of Life and
Apostate or an obstinate Opposer, and Perverter of the right Way of the Lord; then, I say, our Principle of Christ being in some Sense in every Man (viz. as a Light lighting every Man) receives no DisReprobates have not Christ; because they have finally blown out the Candle, extinguish'd Conscience, and are become dead to all Sense of Religion; which is because they have out-liv'd the Day of God's Love and Mercy to them: They would not be gathered; they would have none of him; they would not have this Man to reign over them. But then all others, by this Text, and this Man's arguing from it, have Christ in them; and so it makes greatly for us, since it plainly concludes, That if all that have not Christ in them are Reprobates, then those that are not Reprobates have Christ in them; but such is every Man that cometh into the World, therefore every Man that cometh into the World hath Christ
in him: For, to be sure, Men come not Reprobates into the World. They have a Day of Grace; God calls; his Spirit strives; his Long-suffering waitNoah, for their Repentance. And this is that which will give the greatest Weight in the Scale against the Rebellious, at the great Judgment, that they had a Talent; a Seed was sown, Grace did appear, and all had Light, but such lov'd Darkness rather than Light, because their Deeds were evil. The last Scripture he would turn upon us is that in the Galatians; My little Children, of whom I travel in Birth again until Christ be formed in you: Upon which he says, The Persons spoken to then, had not Christ in them. Thus, he says, every Proof I bring contradicts my own Conclusion; but then, says I, the Galatians must be at that Time ReGalatians, tho' not Reprobates, had him not. But
Seed, and an Ear, a Plant and a Tree, he may better unBut neither in Believers is Christ a Light within. I wonLight of the World, Joh 1. 4, 9. and that true Light that lighteth every Man that cometh into the World; and yet not to be a Light within Man, tho' he be within Man, is surprizing. I shall leave it with my Reader, to do our Principle Justice; and I hope he will find reason to think I have asserted no Errors, nor prevaricated with my Friends, nor lost my Point, nor acted with Leger-de-main, or a Meditated Temperament to deceive; and that all the Wards of my Key, after his many Strainings, Wrestings and Forcings, keep their Places, and answer the End for which the Key was first made (viz.) To open to every Common Ʋnderstanding, the Difference between the Principles of the People
called Quakers, and the Perversions and Misrepresentations of their Enemies: Wish
PAge 62. To their (the Quakers) Scruple about Oaths, I shall only hint these few Thoughts, because True Speaking is not only a part of Honesty, but Religion; therefore not only Honesty, but Religion is engaged, with its full Force to support it self; unless Religion may not support it self: But if a Man engage all his Religion for the Support of a true Speech, he takes an Oath.
If this be true Arguing, then we swear as often as we say Yea and Nay in Evidence, since we acknowledge we stake the Credit of our Religion and
I shall not (says he) insist upon the Nature of an Oath, but consider its Place in the Political State of Christ's Kingdom.
If he will not insist upon the Nature of an Oath, I have no reason to insist upIndividium Vagum; a Nothing. He should first have ascertained us what an Oath is; and when that had been adjusted and settled, then he should have proved such an Oath Lawful, and us unreason
First, he says, He cannot understand how Swearing can be wholly put down, where
People may Swear by Law, as in England. True, unless that Law be Repealed, that requires it. But it is a great Bull to say, That they that make a Law cann't ReYea and Nay have the Force and Acceptance of an Oath, they may have it in any Government, and that is what the People call'd Quakers DeEngland sits upon Honour, and not Oaths, viz. the House of Lords: So Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, that judge Life, are rarely, if ever, upon Oath. So that I have herein answer'd his Question, p. 63. If an Order against all Swearing were not, Ipso Jure, Void. He carries it higher than any Body ever did, that I have met with. It is with him the great Hinge or Axletree upon which Reviz. want of Faith either in him that
For, says he, God the Father Swears to the Son, Heb. 7. where there is infinite Faithfulness on both Sides.
But to this I say, That, strictly speakHeb. 6. 16. so that it is call'd Swearing. that it might strike unbelieving Man with the greater Assurance of God's Love to him. And tho' there was Infi
But he tells us, That Christ answered upon Adjuration before a Judge, which is the way of Swearing in our English Courts.
I cannot allow it, since he does not prove that Christ Swore in his Answer; for all he said was, Thou hast said, Mat.
Gal. 4. 4. He was to fulfil the Righteousness of it, and so might act as a Jew; as he did in the Instance of Cir&c. Yet after his Resurrection we hear nothing of an Oath, any more in Example than in DoYea and Nay succeeded and superceeded all Oaths. So that the very Basis this Man builds upon is Unsound, and his PremiHeb. 1. 6. and therefore Christ and not the Angels are to be follow'd by us; but whenever an Angel hath Sworn, it hath been in Condescention of the Incredulity and Diffidence of Man, and to highten his Credit of the Mind and Will of God; and is therefore an Instance for us, beScotch Boots and Tummikins.
He alledges also, That the Apostles Swore; but he has not mention'd any one of them, nor any Place; However, that I may not leave my Reader as much in the Dark as he has done his, I refer him to my Book, entitul'd, The Spirit of Truth Vindicated, from p. 86 to 91 p. where he may see how much softer TranVulgar Ver
But he adds, That all Christians take Sacramental Oaths: Which is not true in Fact; for among the Protestants of the Low Countries there is a great People, who in any Case will not Swear, as well as we, and yet we know no other Name, Blood, Power and Spirit by wich we can be saved, than that of the Lord JeJohn Wickliff, who would not Swear in any Case; and divers also of our English Martyrs refused to swear, upAncient Fathers were of the same Judgment; be
Now, for what he alledges, Why Christ's Prohibition, Matth. 5. doth not extend to all Oaths, I think it will not be hard to shew it is slight and concludes nothing against us.
First, he says, the Expression whereMatth. 5. 34. with Levit. 5. 1. Eccles. 9. 2. Jer. 23. 10. Zach. 5. 3. Hos. 4. 2. But this is rather against him than for him; since if Christ only forbids what was not lawMoses. But it is plain from the Text, Matth 5. that Christ forbids such Swearing as was
Secondly, Page 64. He limits Christ's Prohibition to those Oaths which had no Sacredness in them, but which the Pha
But, Thirdly, for his Third ParticuGipsy Gibberish in Page 10. and he must explain it before it can be answ
His Fourth PartiWhen it divides this Prohibition into its part, Matth. 5. 35, 36. he does not divide it as against Swearing in all Cases, but sets the Bounds of his Distribution directly to oppose this corrupt Gloss of the Pharisees; for he doth not say, Ye have heard that it hath been said, Ye shall Swear in Truth, in Righteousness and in Judgment; But I say unto ye, Swear not at all; for so far
as concern'd swearing by God the Pharisees Doctrin was sound: But what does Christ say? Why I say unto you Swear not at all; neither by Heaven, nor by Earth, or Jerusalem, or the Head. Directly contrary to swearing by the Temple, the Altar, the Heavens, which the Pharisees taught to be Lawful to do, and not be bound by such kind of Oaths. Which in my opinion is very Weak and Gross; for if it be plain, as it is, that Christ forbad such Oaths as men ought not to break, but to perform to the Lord, then it was not such Oaths as the Pharisees taught to be Lawful to take, and not be bound by them when they had done. So that he forbids such Oaths as he says the Pharisees Doctrin was sound in; because it was what they ought not to break, but perform to the Lord: So that Christ was so far from limiting his Prohibition to the Pharisees Oaths, by Heaven, Earth, Jerusalem or the Head; which this Man says they made not obligatory, that he forbids them, by forbidding those Oaths, that according to the Ancient Doctrin of
Page 67. His fifth Allegation is every whit as much beside the matter as what he said before, viz. That Christ did not condemn swearing by Jerusalem, the Throne, the Foot-Stool, &c. Holily, but as Vainly and Ʋnholily used: Which is to exceed the Bounds of all other Writers; so very heartily does this Man love Swearing. But now I must tell him, that he has much wrested the Text, and perverted the plain and obvious sense of it, and misnew one; eKilling, Adultery &c. As well as of swearing, Mat. 5. 21, 22, 27, 28, 33, 34. Ye have heard that it was said to them of Old, time thou shalt not Kill; but I say unto you, that whosoever is Angry with his Brother without a Cause, shall be in danger of the Judgment; Yea, whosoever shall say thou Fool, shall be in danger of Hell-Fire. Ye have heard that it was said, by them of old time; thou shalt not commit Adultery; but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh upon a Woman to Lust after her, hath committed Adultry with her already in his heart. Again, Ye have heard that it hath been said of Old time, Thou shalt not forswear thy self, but shalt perform thy Oaths to the Lord; but I say unto you swear not at all. Now I would fain know if Christ's Prohibition goes no farther than Moses's; and, if he does not intend by these words, that the Righteousness of the Gospel should exceed that of the Law: The
Thou shalt not Kill, thou shalt not commit Adultery, says Moses: Thou shalt not be Angry, thou shalt not Lust, says Christ. Now this was no false Gloss of the Pharisees in that time, which Christ reprehended or reformed, as this Adversary would suppose; but a plain improvement upon the Rightousness of the Law, viz. Thou shalt not Forswear thy self, but shalt perform to the Lord thine Oaths, says Moses. But I say unto you, swear not at all, says Christ; neither by Heaven, for it is Gods Throne; nor by the Earth, for it is his Foot-stool; neither by Jerusalem, nor thy Head, but let your Communication be Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these, cometh of evil. Upon which even Beza says, that by forWe are not to understand a false Oath, but that it is best not to swear at all. And that what Speech is of an higher naTremelius, out of Maimonides says, He is the best Man that will upon no account swear. And the AnnotatiAnno. 1599 says, Whatever yea vouch, vouch it barely, and whatsoever yea deny, deny it barely, without any more Words; that is, let your affirming and denying be simple and upon the Authority of your own Word and Truth, without going about to find it by the Authority of a Greater and Holier thing, which is not a bare and simple, but a compounded Speech, and so more than Yea, yea; and Nay, Nay; and therefore cometh of Evil. To which that Passage of the Apostle James aptly refers. Jam. 5. 12. But above all things my Brethren swear not, neither by Heaven, nor by Earth, nor by any other Oath; which is to say, as by nothing else; so not by God: But let your Yea, be Yea; and Nay, nay; Lest ye fall into condemnation.
One would think this Man had hardnot to swear at all. Or is it candid in him to limit Christ's prohiPharisees, when Christ looks over their Heads, back to the very Decalogue or Ten Commandments, for an instance, to shew, by comparison, how much the Righteousness of his Kingdom excels that of the Law, that came by Moses▪ I could wish there was no thing but weakness to be charged upon this Man in this particular; but his Abilities look too considerable else where for that, as well as his Disengenuity too frequent; not to conclude it of a meditated Temperament to force the Text, rather than not have his ends upon us: But with what success he has managed it, We must leave to the Judicious Reader.
OF Baptism he writes thus. Baptism is a Rite of Admission into the Family of God, making Persons Citizens of Heaven, and free of the Kingdom of the Messias. It consists of an outward and visi
One would think that this Man had never read the third of Matt. or the first
Acts. For in the first John distin(viz.) I indeed Baptize you with Water to Repentance: But he that cometh after me is mightier then I, whose Shooes I am not worthy to bear: He shall Baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire: Which shews their difNature, Excellency and Efficacy. In the last Scripture Christ himself, just before his parting with his Disciples, does very expressly and Emphatically distinguish betwixt his own Baptism and the Baptism of John. For says he, John truly Baptized with Water, but ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Ghost not many Days hence. I shall not insist upon the force of this place and Context now so fully, as by and by, yet nothing can well be plainer, than that Christs words imply two Baptisms, that's the Water was John's, and the Holy Ghost His: And that his intention was to leave that distinction upon the minds of his Disciples; not only that John's and his were two Baptisms but that Water was
John's and not his. And this too after all is granted by our Opposer himself Page 89. where he says, Can any Man believe that Jesus used John's Baptism, and not his own, in making of Disciples? But he adds Page 78. For neither is the visible part alone, or the invisible by it self, Baptism; but both in union by the Divine Appointment: But where this Divine Appointment is, he does not tell us. Again, Page 87. John did the outward Part, and Jesus the inward Part the same Moment. But surely he is mistaken, when John tells us the Baptism of the holy Ghost was to come after, not to go along with his: And Christ told his Disciples that it was to come, (so that His and John's went not together) And bid them stay at Jerusalem till they received it, viz. The Promise of the Father, which was the pouring forth of the holy Ghost; As the first chapter of the Acts informs us: And that was nigh three Years after they had been Baptized, and Baptized others with Water: So that both did not go together, as this Man Dreams. But
Page 80. For John admitted Men into the Faith of the Messias; That is, into the State of Subjects, owing and acknowledging Allegiance to Christ. And Christ owns this Grant and Admission valid in his Kingdom, and that they were legally instated in the rights of his Kingdom, whom John Baptized: This being done by a publick Authorized Herald of his Kingdom.
But it's strang that John had the powMessiah, or they were to look for another. This is to give John the Keys of David, and to make Regeneration an absolute and neJohn's Baptism were so far from being admitted into the State of Subjects, and enjoying the Rights of Christ's KingActs 18. Apollos is said to know only John's Baptism: And chap. 19. Certain Disciples to John's Baptism, dePaul they had not so much as heard
if there were any such thing as the holy Ghost: So that when Paul askt them, To whom then were you Baptized, they anTo John's Baptism, by way of distinction from Christ's. And the ApoJohn, and that of Christ. And lastly, I must take leave to wonder how he can think to word, upowning an admission into his Kingdom by John's Baptism, and that such are Legally instated in the Rights thereof, beJohn, when Christ himself says, That the least in the Kingdom of God, is greater then John; which implys that John himself was not of that Kingdom: And because that canJohn, for so he was certainly a glorious Subject of it, it must refer to his AdNicodemus, that unless a Man be born again he cannot
see the Kingdom of God; How then is he a Subject, and invested in the Rights of that Kingdom? Again, did John's BapRegenerate? If it did, What need of Fire and Holy Ghost that John said was to come after? What need of any thing after John's, if it was so effectual, or was he always attended with such a Power as is affirmed? Where now is our Adversaries haughty assertion, That John's Disciples, as such, were the Subjects of Christ's Kingdom, and Legally invested in the Rights thereof, when it is plain that the least of that Kingdom is greater than their very Baptizer, the Great Herald of the Kingdom? But that ExFor the Forerunner ends in Him, He Foreruns, and the Herald in the Presence of his King. He has forThe Prophets lasted till John, and he ended them, but he did not begin the Christian Dispensation; that was Christ's work. John's Baptism left men in that Old World of Jewish
Rites, where it found them; but tis Christ's that makes all things new; new Heavens, new Earth and new Creatures to Inherit them.
But says this Author, Christ declares, that being Baptized with Water, was a part of Righteousness; Which it could not be, unless there was a Law of the Kingdom for it. As if it might not be Righteousness without such a Law: For with his favour there is as much to be said for Christ's Circumcision and eating the Pascal Lamb, &c. Since that was to fulfil all Righteousness too; and yet there was no Law of the Kingdom of Christ for them, unless this be one, that Christ was to fulfil the Righteousness of the Law, which he did in General, to introduce the Kingdom of God. For Christ's fulfilling of the Law and the Prophets, of which John was the Last, made way for the Kingdom to come, which was not of this World, nor are its Rights, by consequence; but of its own nature. That Christ did fulfil all Righteousness in condescending and conbeing made under the Law for that very purpose. So that his being Baptized by John does not Establish, or any more confirm that Baptism, than his being Circumcised after Moses does perpetuate Circumcision. On the conJohn's Baptism. Moses and the Prophets were till John, and John was till Christ; both had their times, and both their Periods in him.
I am not he, says John; but John's Baptism is It, says this Opponent, which is to put John's Baptism in the room of Christ's; and John's Ministry, tho' not his Person, in lieu of Christ's. Now Moses and the Prophets were as the Stars of the Night; John as the Morning Star, the Forerunner of Day. He rose last, but shined most: But tho' the Morning Star be the most burning and shining of all
Page 81. But this Man tells us, That Christ gave commission to his Disciples to Baptize with Water, Matt. 28. 19. And that they did understand it so by their Practice. But is it practicable or possible that any Scripture can reasonably be said to declare an Institution, or be the ComGo ye, Teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and holy Ghost. Mat. 28. 19. Now Christ by this Commission must mean his own Baptism of the Spirit, and that from the nature and force of the Words, as well as comparison of them, with other places to which they relate, and that are also lately Explanatory of them. The words are not in the Name, but into the Name of the Father, &c. Which must refer to the Power and Spirit of Christ; Water being too feeble to change and wash a Heart, which is the import of Baptizing into the Name or Nature of the Father, Son and holy Ghost: That is, by the Ministry which is from the Spirit. So Mark 16. Where Christ saith They shall cast out Devils in my Name; that is, by my power, or by the virtue or force of Spirit, which shall attend you for that work and service, that many may be turned from the evil of their way and made Heirs of an endless King
In fine, after you have received the Spirit, you shall Teach and Baptize, or Dip, Plunge, and Interest them that be&c. Qualifying them to bear the holy and excellent name of Father, Son and holy Ghost.
And that this is not strained, but naAllegory upon the Text, I shall desire my Reader to look forward, to the First of the Acts, and the First nine verses; which plainly expounds this Commission, and consequently resolves us what Baptism it refers to; particularviz. And being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly Baptized with Water; but ye shall be Baptized with the holy Ghost, not many Days hence. But ye shall receive power after that the holy Ghost is come upon you: And ye shall be witnesses, unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea,
and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the Earth. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight.
In which three things are observable. First that Christ Distinguishes his BapJohn's. Secondly, That he assigns Water to John's, and the holy Ghost to his own Baptism. Not that John and he had two Water Baptisms, yet two Baptisms, but that John's was the Water Baptism, and his the Baptism of the holy Ghost. Therefore his is not a Water Baptism, but a Baptism contraJohn▪ was from the Person of Christ.
Thirdly, by comparing the 28th of Mat. with this place in the Acts, we may see that the Commission in one, is to be construed by the qualification in the other, which is not exprest at all in Mat. 28. There they are bid to Go; here they are bid to Stay; that is, Stay before you go, and have your Qualifications before
you Qualify; viz. The Promise of the Father, to wit, the Baptism of the holy Ghost; that is to say, Power from on High. Why, had they been Preaching 2 or 3 Years, and been Baptized and Baptizing with Water, that this Man says is followed, that Moment, with the Baptism of the holy Ghost, and yet had not been themselves Baptized with it, nor as yet received Power from on High to Disciple and Baptize any into Christ's Kingdom, with Christ's Baptism? This must be strange to our Opponent, and who can help it? But so it is, Reader. For that as one Evangelist, and part of Scripture, supplies and explains another, this in the Acts shews, that the ComMatt. supposes the QualificatiJerusalem, till they had received the Promise of the Father; that is, till they were Baptized with the holy Ghost, and then the Commission took place, for them to Go and Teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost. Now then, if in order of time, and from the nature of the Discourse, it must be so, how is the BapMat. a Water Baptism? John truly Baptized with Water, but ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Ghost not many Days hence: Then Go ye, Teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, &c. It is plain, this is the true Order of the Discourse; not onpreceeding Commission, (for they need no such to Baptize with Water, having done that 2 or 3 Years before, without it) But for that Bapalone in Mat. 28. 19. Which would have been Ambiguous, had not that passage in Acts 1. 5. preceeded, which made it needless to tell us what
For John truly Baptized with Water, but ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Ghost not many Days hence: Therefore not with John's Baptism any more, but with the BapSpirit, do you go Teach all Nations, Baptizing them through the Holy Spirit; into the Name of the Father, of the Son and Holy Ghost; Make them true Jews, true Israelites, in whom there is no guile. And tis certain it was a new Scene and Part they had to Act; as much Superior to what was before, as Form is to Power, Letter to Spirit, Shadow, to Substance. Greater things than these shall ye do, said our Blessed Lord, because I go to my Father. I think I have not strained the Text, or extorted a wrong meaning. I write what I believe, and take to be the genuine sense of the place, without partiality, or passion. But our Adversary will have it, that the Apostles used Water Baptism, in persuPeter in the case of Cornelius,
Can any Man forbid Water, that these should not be Baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? Upon which, says our Opponent p. 82. If it had not been an Ordinance, any one might have forbid it, therefore the Apostles accounted themselves obliged by God to do so; and that it was not in their Power to refuse it, unless they would resist God. To which I say, as before. First that Water BapJohn's, and not Christ's. SePractice is no Institution. Thirdly, That the Apostle Peter did but continue a Practice, introduced by John, not easily left among a CeremoPeter could not but know, after those DistinActs 1st. But the Disciples having before been actually enJohn's Baptism, in order to call People to the expectation
John, to whose Ministry it was the peculiar obJohn said was at hand, and which Christ came to set up) was withConcluded the Prophets, and became therein the Fore-runner of Christ, and his more excellent Dispensation. Lastly, The Reason of Peter's Words, Can any Man forbid Water &c. referred not to the Institution, Authority or Force of Water Baptism, but to Peter's Caution about Cornelius, that was a Gentile for fear he should give any publick distast to the Jews, whose prejudices against the Gentiles, like some Predestinarians of our Times, excluded them any pretence to Religion; insomuch that we see Peter himself, without a Vision, was not yet large enough in his Spirit, to credit Comliness, Convictions and Devotion; as much as if he had said, Why may
not this Man, though a Gentile, be Baptized with Water, since he has received the Holy Ghost, which is the requisite QuaTrue Christian; and that the promise of the Father is to them that are a far off, even to all that the Lord our God shall call, as well as to the Seed of Abraham, after the Flesh. So that the Reason of Peter's using those words, was not to give Authority to Water Baptism; as an Ordinance of Christs Kingdom, but to excuse himself against Jewish exceptions, that he fearƲnclean, Prophane and Reprobate.
His other Scripture in defence of what he asserts, is Acts 9. 18. which says, That Paul received his sight, and was Baptized by Ananias. But not a word of Water, is in the Text, or the foregoing or following Verses. On the contrary there is reason to believe it was not meant. And Ananias putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord (even Jesus that appeared unto thee
in the way as thou camest) hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost; and immediately there fell from his eyes, as it had been scales, and he received his sight forthwith, and arose and was baptized. Now here is, first, Sight and Holy Ghost to be given to Saul, by the Ministry of Ananias: Next, he received Sight, and was Baptized. Now must not this be the BapHoly Ghost, since being fill'd with the Holy Ghost, and being Bapone and the same thing? Especially since it is past all Controversie, that there was such a thing as the Baptism of the Holy Ghost.
His other Scripture, to prove the AuActs 11. 15, 16, 17. And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembred I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with Wabut you shall be baptized with the HoForasmuch then as God gave them the like Gift as he did unto us, who
believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I that I could resist God?
Which is so far from weakening, that it confirms our Sense and Assertion: For the bent of Peter's Words is to justifie himself, in going to, and communing with the Ʋncircumcision, and not to vinCornelius's Righteousness and Devotion. And, 3. God's owning of him, in that the Holy Ghost fell upon him as it had upon them at the Beginning. For asmuch then, says Peter, as God gave them the like Gift, what was I that I could withstand God? As if he had said, How could I refuse to own them, and have Fellowship with them that God own'd and had Fellowship with, and Gifted and Sanctified, as well as the believing Jews? speaking not one Word in his Account to the Brethren, of Water-Baptism: But, on the contrary, he makes it John's, by way of Distinction from Christs Baptism, by remembring and repeating
viz. John indeed baptized with Water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. I appeal to every indifferent Reader, if I have not done Justice to the Text.
I shall next consider his Exceptions to what I say in my Key, in defence of our Disuse or Cessation of Water-Baptism, &c.
Page 83, 84. The first Reason he makes me give for it, is, That all Protestants are against Figures and Shadows: To which he answers, But Baptism and the Lord's Supper being no Figures nor Shadows, all Protestants are for them; unless the Quakers are to be accounted Protestants, that disown all Protestant Churches, and are own'd by none. This is all he quotes of mine, and this is what he says, on what he has quoted: So that they may be of the Nature of Shadows and Figures for all him; and consequently that Protestants practise against Judgment. For he only denies them to be Figures and Shadows, and leaves us there. But he had done well if he had given us his
Key, which immediately foregoes what he has cited out of it; viz. That Practice only, is no Institution; and that is all he can allege in favour of John's Baptism. That which seems my part to perform, tho' he presses not upon me, is to shew, that Water-Baptism and the Lord's Supper (so called) are of the Nature of Figures and Shadows, of which Christ was the Substance.
Now, that they are so, we must conJohn, as John renders him, Matth. 3. 11. John 3. 30. and Christ himself suggests to us, Matth. 11. 7 to 12. Then Water-Baptism was but a Forerunner, and shewleast in the Kingdom of Heaven exceeded, and therefore not of the KingObservation, peculiar to John's Ministry, it had obtained Credit, and therefore was continued, ex gratia. But
The Kingdom of God came not with Observation, Luke 17. 20. At least thereProtestants ought to be modest upon us, with respect to the Reason we renCessation of Water - Baptism. And tho' he says, We ought not to be accounted Protestants, that disown all ProteChurches, and are owned by none of them: I would have this Author to know, We are True Protestants: Protestants upon those Reasons, that were the first Motives to that Character; and can compare, in our Negatives, with any Species of Protestants. And do challenge this Author, without Vanity, upon that Head, begin when he will.
At the same time, we cannot but have Charity for the Persons of Roman Catholicks, and would by that teach them the Truth and greater Excellency of our Religion.
And next, for our disowning of all other Protestant Churches, and not being owned by them; first it is not upon the same Grounds that the Roman Catholicks
all sorts of Protestants do to one another; and there
But, he is mightily displeased with me, For being against all Figures in the Time of the Gospel; adding, That we Mortals cannot think, or speak, or work without Figures; distinguishing between prenunciative and commemorative Signs: Ridiculing me for such an Assertion. But if my Reader will turn to Page 24. of my Key, cited by this Author, he will find I only deny, under the Gospel, the Necessity and Service of prenunciative or forerunning Signs: Joyning to Signs, Figures and Shadows; and promiscuviz. That the Nature of the Gospel is Inward, Spiritual and Eternal. But he
That therefore the continuing to practise Figures, Signs and Shadows, as still in force, which forerun Christ and his Dispensation, make his Coming of none effect. For then he had given too strong a Reason for our Disuse, and disappointprenunciative or forerunning ones: Such as are of the Nature of Figures and Shadows, and therefore can have no Commission to perpetuate them; of which I take Water Baptism and the Supper to be two. For Christ, as well as John, declares Water-Baptism a Forerunner of a more excellent Baptism. And one thing wherein that Excellency of Christ's Baptism consists, is the durableness of it: But if John's is to last as long as Christ's, Christ's does not excel John's in Duration; quite contrary to John's own Discrimination and Testimony, viz. He (Christ) shall increase and I decrease. But if it be considered, That this AdverExodus 7. 8. 9. Numb. 11. Psal. 77. Jer. 32. Just as his Friend J. Faldo, and some of that Ingenuity, have made us to deTemporary and Extraordinary Cases (as that of Jeremiah, Jonas, Amos, &c.) That which is a Command to another is no Com
I say, they that consider the Justice of my Pa
I am then no more against Figures than against Forms. We cannot, I know, live, speak or act without them: But these are not forerunning Signs or Forms, Temporary and Shadowy Observations: But such necessary and essential ones, as are
But, from this he falls hard upon me, because I say the Gospel is Inward, Spiritual, and Eternal: For, says he, without many Figures, this is not Sense, and with them, is either not true or not to the Purpose. The Gospel being the new Covenant, is neither Inward nor Outward. Will W. P. never leave talking of Inside and Outside, of things that have no Sides? This Language, I doubt not, will sound harsh, as well as light, to other PeoJeremiah, he would have found there, That the Gospel is an inward State, and has an Inside; where God, speakBehold the days come that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day
that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt (which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord) But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: For they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Now here is Truth with its both Sides: Truth in its outward Apperance, according to the low and carnal State of Man: And this may be called, comparatively, the Outside of Truth. Here also we may learn, That Truth has an Inside; a more SpiriGospel Dispensation: Or that this more Inward and Spiritual AppeaGospel of the Kingdom, than the Blessing of the Power of God, to deliver Man from the Power of Sin, and Satan the Original of it? So the Apostle phrases it; The Gospel is the Power of God to Salvation. That is, the Power of the Kingdom of God, and that is the Gospel of the Kingdom. Now if this be not of an Inward, Spiritual and Eternal Nature, nothing can be: Which, I presume, the Reader will, with me, think an absurd as well as un
But he says, It is partly Inward and partly Outward. I say it is Inward, but it may be Outwardly exprest by a godly Conversation; and so far, and no otherviz. That the Gospel and New Covenant, came not with Outward Observations; and that Water-Baptism was such; Therefore no Ordinance of the Kingdom of the Messiah.
But if it be an Ordinance, as this Aup. 87. and that the Inward Part keeps Time with the Outward (for there he allows of Inside and Outside) then it would do so to as many as have the Outward Part administred to them: But we have no Evidence of such ConEnvy, Pride, Luxury and Covetousness prevail, and Little of the true Cross of Christ, Self-Denial, Dying dayly, or the New Creature appears: How then does the Inward Grace make up but one Baptism, if it accompany not Water? But of that I have already treated before; and, it is plain, 'tis but Gratis Dictum on our Adversaries Side. He begs the Question.
Lastly, p. 90. finding himself a-ground about that Passage of the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. 1. 7. For Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel. He enThat since Water-Baptism was Peter's and his Brethren's Commission, which Christ gave them before the Ascention, to the End of the World—It is not to be imagined that Matthias and Paul were without it. But in this also he begs the Question.
I have already shew'd that CommissiJohn's and not Christs; and that they were not one Baptism, or inseparable in their Admino institution, and that Water-Baptism is a prenunciative Sign, and has its AccomJohn had in Christ; the two Administrators of the two Baptisms.
But next, he says, Paul spoke an Ellipsis, elegantly; meaning, That he was not sent only to Baptize, but chiefly to Preach; citing Two or Three Scriptures, that he imagins Parallel, and Illustrate
Hos. 6. 6. I will have mercy and not sacrifice. And, let women adorn themselves, not with putting on of apparel, &c. 1 Pet. 3. 34. Now, says he, These Places prove, that the Israelwere not to sacrifice to God, and Women must go naked, &c. (as some Quawith the same Evidence that Paul's Words teach, That Christ sent not him to Baptize. He might, if he had pleased, have cut it all short, and like what L. Muggleton once said of Moses, have told us, Paul did not mean what he writ. But these Places are ill apply'd by this Man, for when God said, He would have Mercy and not Sacrifice; he meant not to have Sacrifice at that Time, and in those Cases, wherein he called for Mercy: He would not be so put off, nor have Duties exchanged. That Speech is limited to, and to be interpreted by the present State of the People he spoke to, who were unqualified for Sacrifice, because they were unmerciful and cruel, and the merciful God in that State would have none of their Sacrifices. What is
viz. Garments of Finery and Ornament, and not useful Cloathing.
So that the Apostle meant what he said in the use of the Word, for such Ap
For his saying, That some of our Women have gone naked; 'tis affirmed with Lightness and Untruth; tho' some few of our Friends have gone naked, for a Sign to this Generation, as the poor Man in it that prophesied of the Fire of London, and another, of God's stripping some Persecutors of their Power, and in perticular, that Generation of the Clergy that precceded the Restoration, which having Rise through Persecution, forgat their Pleas, when they had Power, to
To conclude, It is plain, the Apostle had no Obligation upon him to this ExBaptizers; not a Word of Baptism it self, to over or undervalue that Tradition. Why then does Paul take occasion, not only to knock them, but Baptism too? What had Baptism done to be so coursely treated? So SaMessiah, p. 80? Why, without doubt, it was to let them
(for who is Paul, and who is Apollos) that they ought not to value themselves upon that very Baptism, since it was not what he had in Commission, but what he had used as a Tradition, that had obtained some Credit among them: Else the Apostle must not have had the same Commission that the other Apostles had, who yet said, he was behind none of the rest of the Apostles.
Again, Baptizing, in Matth. 28. 19. was as much the Apostle's Commission as Teaching or Preaching: Nay, the preferable Part. For tho' Preaching open'd their Understandings, it was Baptism that gave them Admission into the Kingdom of the Messiah; made them Subjects thereof; and instated them in the Rights of it: Yea, the Seal of the Covenant that God made by Christ with Mankind, without which no Remission of Sins, or entring of God's Kingdom. Can such a Baptism, (and such an one this Adversary renders WaPaul's Commission, or not upon eFather, Son and Holy Ghost? that is, to be made, quaTrue Christians, Subjects of Christ's Kingdom, Citizens of Heaven, and endowed with all the Priviledges thereof. How little is this Man willing to allow Baptism to be, that he may keep it any thing in Force, and excuse it from the genuine Sense of the Apocircumcising of Timothy) that Baptism that is intended in Christ's Commission, Matth. 28. must be the Baptism of the
Holy Ghost. And this is the less to be doubted, since the same Apostle that deIf an Ordinance of Christ, and the Right of Admission into the Kingdom of the Messiah) makes Baptism an Article in his Epitomy of Christianity; viz. that there is (Eph. 4. 5, 6.) One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism: One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. This Baptism being therefore esActs 1. 15.
But, after all, I know not what Right this Man has to argue upon the Head of Water-Baptism against us; since, if I mistake him not, he is of those that make Children the Subjects of that Practice, who cannot believe, nor be taught in order to it; and therefore not within the Scope and Direction of the Text. If it should be said, That Children may be as well Baptized as Circumcized; I say no: For Faith was not so personJohn's, and not Christ's; therefore, not in conLord's Supper; far beyond Signs, and as if they were the inward Graces themselves: Too often referring thither, rather than to the Obedience of Faith in Christ; and falsly quieting their un
Page 92. The same in Substance may be said of the Lord's Supper as of Baptism.
Repl. Then the same, in Substance, may serve in Defence of the other.
He adds,
Christ celebrates it with his Disciples, signifying, That his Meaning was, they should persorm this Servtce at other Times, after his Death, by constraining them to do it in Remembrance of hsm, which is a full Institution of this Service.
Repl. That which Christ celebrated was the Pascal Lamb, or Passover, which he told his Disciples he so much longed to eat with them. And this was the Jews great Anniversary Supper, in ComPharoah, and passEgypt, towards the Land that God had promised their FaAbraham, he would give to his OffMemorial, or in Remembrance of him, viz. his Death, till he came to them again.
He did hereby,
I. Inform them of his Departure and Death, by giving them a Memorial of him, which was so hard for them to think of.
II. He tells them, That he will not leave them Comfortless, he will come to them again, and he will drink new Wine with them in the Kingdom of his Father, which, in its due Season should
III. That they were to look to that Coming, as an Accomplishment of that Memorial.
IV. That this must refer to his SpiriLuke 24. 11, 25. are enough observ'd; even after all they had heard and seen of the Power of Christ.
That this Practice lasted longer I grant, but that it lasted of Authority, I find not, but rather of Weakness: Signs generally have a Resemblance of the things they signifie or represent: There seems none in any other respect to me, so proper and suitable, as of Christ being the Bread that came down from Heaven, Joh. 6. and as such he came to his Disciples some time after his Ascention, (for as yet they were, as before observ'd, in several respects, Weak, yea, Carnal,
Page 93. As to what this Author says, That the Apostle Paul had a Commission to administer this Srcrament, 1 Cor. 11 to 26. It is his Mistake; for it was not a Commission but a Tradition. He tells us what he received of the Lord's doas often as they do it. But if that Chapter be well read, the poor and mean Condition of the People, he writ to, will be seen, to whom Signs, well un
Page 94, 95. But our Adversary will have it, That Christ's Coming is to Judgment, at the End of all things, and till then, this Sacrament, as he calls it, is to continue: Telling me, That when Christ said, he would not drink any more of the Fruit of the Vine, till he should drink it new, with them, in the Kingdom of his Father, Christ indeed means it of a Spiritual Wine, but that the kingdom of his father was heaven, and therefore the Sign was not to cease till that Kingdom began, which was not to be, till Christ had delivered up the Kingdom unto God, even his Father, at the End of the World.
Repl. But he has forgot, surely, that in the same page he allows the Kingdom of God was then, among the Jews, tho' not in them, and so come before the end of the World. And if he would have call'd to mind the first Sentence of John the Baptist's Sermon, and the Drift of the Disciples Ministry, that Christ sent
Repent, for the kingdom of God, or of heaven, is at hand, as Matt. 3. 2. ch. 10. 7. Then not so far off as the End of the World. Again, the Apostle declared, Heb. 12. 22, 23, 24. the true Believers of his Day were come to mount Zion, God the judge of all, and to the spirits of the just made perfect; and also that they sat in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, which must be an Attainment above Signs of invisible Grace; being the Life and Substance of Religion, and so the Period and Consummation of Types, Shadows, and such sort of Signs or Significations as are in question. They that personally enjoy their dearest Friends will not repair to their Pictures, tho' drawn never so much to the Life, to quicken their Remembrance of them. Christ did promise his, That he would come again, he would not leave them comfortless, and that he would drink of the Cup or Fruit of the Vine after a new, or other manner with them, even in the Kingdom of his Father. And in the Revelations,
O Yes! Behold, says he, I stand at the door and knock; if any man hear my voice and openeth the door, I will come in to him, and SƲP with him, and he with me. This, we are not ashamed to say, is our Supper, or the Supper of the Risen and Glorified Jesus, which the People called Quakers do acknowledge, profess and practice as the Lord's Supper; the True Gospel, New Covenant-Supper: The Supper of and in the Kingdom of God; which is come up in thousands, blessed be his Name, and is coming more and more among, and up in the Hearts of the Children of Men. And tho' the Seed of this Kingdom be sown in all, yet the good Ground alone knows it to grow to Advantage. Those that obey the Manifestation of the Light of the Lord Jesus in their Souls, the Seed of this Kingdom, are the true and sensiIsai. 9. 5, 6, 7. And such as can say, Thy Kingdom is come, and thy Will is done, in Earth as it is in Heaven. Even so come Lord Jesus, more and more set up thy Kingdom in the Souls of the Children of Men; that the Holy Will of thy Father may be done in Earth, that Mercy, and Truth, and Righte
Errata, pages 4 and 5, lines last and first, dele V.
PAge 29. line 6. read is to be. p. 32. l. 14.are. p. 46. l. 9. r. because we. p. 52. l. 17beca use God. p. 59. l. 7. r. abuseth. p. 63. l. 1shall have. p. 69. l. 2. r. so that. l. 19. dele
p. 86. l. ult. r. he doubles. p. 87. l. 7. r. the Int
p. 90. l. 4. r. having darkened. p. 100. l. 23to the. p. 102. l. 11. r. cur low. l. 24. dele, wparts. p. 109. l. 7. r. to bind
111. l. 4. r. with the. p. 112. l. 21. r. th
p. 120. l. 9. r. also plainly. l. 21. r. my Spirit.
Evangelists. p. 124. l. 21. r. neede
127. l. 25. r. Cornelius's Convictions. p.unchristian Conclusion. p. 143. l. 20.did. p. 154. l. 8. r. to God. p. 156. l. 5.set.