The Snake in the Grass Further Discovered, Part 2 · Chapter 14
CHAP. XIV.
They deny the Ordinance of hearing the Word preached.
THey will allow a hearing the Word preached, SECT. I and that muſt be the light within, but the mind of God contained in the Scripture, they muſt by no meanes hear preached, for (as I hinted from G. Fo… ) we muſt not hear man; for the Prophets bid, Ceaſe from man. But having already ſo largely proved their tenet to be, That only the light within muſt be attended to, I need not do the ſame thing over and over▪ I will give you a Scripture or two to ſtrengthen you againſt this fancy-full teacher, the light within. And how ſhall they preach except they be ſent? as it is written, Rom. 10. 15, 18.How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the G…ſpel of peace? &c. But, I ſay, have they not heard? yea verily, their ſound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. Here are more preachers than one, and theſe Texts explain what is meant by the word, nigh thee, in the 8th verſe, which the Quakers lay as a ſtrong Foundation for their light within. This Word muſt be heard, or they could not believe; and it could not preach it ſelf, for they could not hear without a Preacher; and theſe Preachers could not be the Word Chriſt, for they had feet, which Chriſt, as within Believers, Chriſt as the Eternal God, hath not; and the Preachers were more than one, whereas Chriſt the Word is but one, as appears by the Relatives plural, they, them, theirs.
But now I am upon the point of hearing the Word, § 2 a great Myſtery of the Quakers comes into my mind, and it is worth the revealing.
That is this: They hold it is the light that preaches, the light that is preached, the light that hears or is preached to; and ſo the light, which with them is God, Father, Son, and Spirit, is all concerned in the Goſpel, and man nothing at all, for it is the light that doth all alſo. I think when I have proved this, I have diſcovered that which will render the Quakers the moſt abſurd and blaſphemous, that ever undertook to ſpeak with mans voice.
Queſt. Is there ſomething of God in my conſcience, Smith Prim. p. 2.that will give me the knowledge of him? Anſw. There is not any thing elſe that can do it.
And man cannot know him [God] by any other way, Smith Cat. p. 12.but by the manifeſtation of his light within him.
Now I ſhall prove, that the light is the main § 3 (if not the only) thing to be preached, according to the Quakers Tenets. Mind the light of God which hath convinced you.
And this is the meaning of our Doctrine, to bring people to the everlaſting Word of God in themſelves.
And that this light within is alſo preached to, and the only Auditor of the Doctrines which the Quakers ſay are preached, and taught by the light, is proved by theſe inſtances. To the light of God in all your conſciences I ſpeak, which is one in all. So I deſire that Parnel's Shield of the Truth, Epiſtle. p. 42. Fox great myſtery, &c. p. 15.you may mind the light of God, to which I ſpeak, which is my witneſs. Prieſt. There is nothing in man to be ſpoken to, but man. Anſw. How then miniſtred the Apoſtle to the Spirit? And Chriſt ſpake to the Spirits in priſon: And Timothy was to ſtir up the gift that was in him.
I muſt not ravel into theſe Texts now, as brought in by Fox; I ſhall ſay more of it in the following1 Pet 3. 19 opened. pages▪ only take notice, that theſe Spirits were the ſouls of thoſe men (and ſo a part of them) with whom the Spirit of God did ſtrive before the Floud, but are now (as the Devils) under the irreverſible ſentence of damnation, which is in part already executed on them. Over and above, George Fox is both out of the humility, and the meekneſs, (as they phraſe it) and out of the knowledge of himſelf, and out of his wits alſo, in ſaying, That there is a proof to thee, that the Quakers are ſent of God, who ſpeak to thee of the Fox great myſtery. p 64. §. 4.Scriptures right as they are.
I am laſtly to ſhew you by good proof, that the light within is the obedient ſubject alſo, to its own abſolute and infallible dictates; and then I have diſcharged a very fair Province. Now is the life, the faith, the obedience of the Son, the thing which is of value Pennington queſt. …26.in us. So that their obedience is the obedience of the Son, alias the light in them; which is all one with the light in me obeys. And upon this conceit it is, that they ſay they are ſaved by the righteouſneſs of Chriſt, becauſe they account all the righteouſneſs done by them, to be the pure and unmixt acts of the light within.
We are accuſed that we judge people. Anſw. Where Parnel Shield of the truth, p. 3.Chriſt rules in his Saints he judgeth, as Paul ſaid, It is no more I, but Chriſt in me. I forbear here to remark his forging of Scripture, or making Gods ſtream to turn the Devils Mill: But, right or wrong … plain he would have you believe, it is not their act, but Chriſts act. And if you enquire of any of them, (that have drunk in their principles, and are not Novice-Quakers) whether any act of their obedience to the light, be their obedience? they will anſwer, no, no, 'tis the obedience of Chriſt; the obedience is of the light.
The Quakers diſown Goſpel-Prayer.
I take Goſpel Prayer to be the ſouls uttering its SECT. II wants and deſires to God, by way of humble ſupplication, with an audible voice, when it is exerciſed ſolemnly in a Congregation, or Family; with or without an audible voice, when a perſon is private: but alway in the name, and for the ſake and merits of Jeſus Chriſt. And this the Quakers diſown.
That they uſe not prayer (audibly at leaſt) with § 2 their Families daily, is known by all that have opportunities of ſo converſing with them; wherein they ſin againſt our Saviours Directory: After this manner Mat. 6. 9. Luke 11. 2.pray ye, &c. When ye pray, ſay, Our Father, &c. And in both, one Petition is, Give us this day our daily bread; wherein two things are implied: Firſt, Prayer by more than one; Our Father give us. Secondly, Family-Prayer; for that the whole Family ſharing in common in the plenty or ſcarcity of proviſion, (eſpecially for the Belly, which is the great ſpender) they are concerned to put up their joynt ſupplications to God for daily bread, and that daily; which might have made a third Note, viz. That although we may pray every prayer we offer up to the Lord, for proviſion to our lives end; yet we are to pray for it every day and eſpecially for the proviſion of the preſent day▪ But this the Quakers wholly diſuſe, as a con… …tible form.
That they crave not Gods bleſſing, nor expreſs § their thankfulneſs at Set-meals for their Table mercies, is as notorious as the other: whereas we have Chriſts example for it; And Jeſus took the loaves, and John 6, 9. Mark 6, 41. Acts 27, 35,when he had given thanks, he diſtributed, &c. And when he had taken the five loaves, and the two fiſhes, he looked up to heaven, and bleſſed, &c. So Paul, He took bread, and gave thanks to God in the preſence of them all; and when he had broke it, he began to eat, &c.
All that ever I could learn of the Quakers acknowledgment § 4 of benefits received, or receiveable by us, from what the Man Chriſt Jeſus did and ſuffered in the world, amounts but to this: He left us a perfect example; and yet they think ſcorn to follow that, as below ſuch ſpiritual perſons.
He lo…ked up to heaven; which implies, he did it for example ſake at leaſt, (though all the fulneſs of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily) expreſs the Divine Being (eſpecially, and in his more glorious Manifeſtations) to be above, or beyond the viſible boundaries of this little World. And as it is againſt Chriſts example, ſo againſt ſomewhat more than a Goſpelprecept: For every Creature of God is good, and nothing 1 Tim, 4. …. 5.to be refuſed, if it be received with thanksgiving, for it is ſanctified by the Word of God, and Prayer. So tha… to omit this duty (which therefore Paul would not when in a ſtorm, and the company in a conſternation w…h ſ…ar of death) renders the Creature no good to us, as being unſanctified by God.
But rather than this ſhall paſs for a proof of what we aſſert, and for a rebuke to the Quakers ſpirit of diſobedience, James Naylor will ingage his InfallibilityNaylor love to the loſt. p. 57. to bring them off clear. But where the pure is not (viz. the light) all things are defiled, when they are not ſanctified by the Word, and Prayer, and therefore are to be received in fear, and therein remembring his death till he come, who is the Word, and Prayer. And now ſoul take thine eaſe, eat and drink; for if thou haſt the Quakers light within thee, thou needeſt not frame thy ſelf to the ſerious imployment of Prayer, and Thankſgiving at Meals; for the light within (the Quakers only Chriſt) is not only the word that commands prayer, but prayer alſo in the abſtract; and they that have that, cannot at any time be without prayer, though they are altogether ſilent.
They alſo deny publick Miniſterial prayer: for although…. 5. they have ſome who utter Petitions, they do it (as I am informed) always in the firſt perſon ſingular, I pray thee, not We pray thee. So that although they may pray for others, they pray not with them as their mouth, which is contrary to Chriſts Directory, and the Communion of Saints in the Ordinances of the Goſpel. And if uncontrolled Fame fa…l not, they give this reaſon for it, That they both pray and declare for the ſakes of others, not their own, who are obedient to the light▪ for they need neither.
But there are three things that fully prove their SECT III denying of Goſpel-prayer. Firſt, Their contempt of true Goſpel-prayer. So the ſame Wiſdom may deny Smith Cat p. 10….the preſcribed way, as betng formal, and may invent ſomething inſtead of it, in a higher myſtery of iniquity; and though they may not ſpeak in ſuch formal words compoſed, yet in the ſame wiſdom their words are formal: they can ſet their own time to begin and end, and when they will they can utter words, and when they will they can be ſilent; and this is the unclean part which offers to God, which he doth not accept, &c. What the wiſdom is, intended by the Author, you ſhall ſee by and by: but the main formality inveighed againſt is keeping of ſet-times; but they may forgive us this errour, it being ſo well known, that they have ſet-times, and exceed their ordinary hours no more than we. And the wiſdom of the fleſh is, that we do it in our own wills. If they mean not in obedience to the will of God, 'tis more then they know: if it be according to the will of God, and our wills comply with that, it is ſo much the better, for God likes no ſervice againſt, nor without the will. To chooſe the things that pleaſe God, pleaſes God very well. But that conceived prayer (as ſuch) ſhould be with iniquity, a myſtery of iniquity, and that to ſo high a degree, is a bold charge. It is well known, that many of them, when they come into our Congregations, and are preſent when the miniſter is at prayer, they will ſit allIſa. 56. 4 the while in the midſt, with their Hats on their heads, in contempt, which I my ſelf have experienced more than once.
Secondly, Owning no prayers that is not by immediate § 2 inſpiration, and motion of the Spirit; and with out the uſe of our conception, and direction of the underſtanding. But as every creature is moved by the Spirit Naylor Love to loſt p. 13.of the living God, who is that Spirit who will be ſerved with his own alone, not with any thing in man, which is come in ſince the fall; ſo the imaginations, thinkings, and c…nceivings Smith Cat. p. 100.are ſhut out. So all muſt come to the Spirit of God, by the Spirit to be ordered, and ceaſe from their own word, and from their own time, and learn to be ſilent till the Spirit give them utterance.
That we ought to pray in the Spirit, and with the Spirit, is far from us to deny: but he that prayes according to the mind of the Spirit of God revealed in the Scripture, (which is the Spirits Directory) and who, by the commands, exhortations, and promiſes therein contained, is moved to pray: he prays in the Spirit, and with the Spirit, although he have no immediate motions from the Divine Being. He that obeys Gods commands in his written Word, doth his duty, and is through Chriſt accepted of him. But leaſt you ſhould miſtake the Quakers meaning of the phraſe, traditions of men, take notice, That they hold the written Word, and what is therein contained as its ſence, to be but the traditions of men, except it come to us by immediate inſpiration, as to the Prophets and Apoſtles, and not at ſecond hand; which I have already proved, and therefore need not do it over again.
By what I have here produced, you may learn, That § 3 they deny any thing of man to be exerciſed in prayer. If he intend hereby, only the depravation that is come in ſince the fall, it were every right: but certainly faith in the Redeemer, and the promiſes which in him are yea and amen, the encouragement to prayer are come in ſince the fall though no part of the fall; and all the Ordinances of Chriſt, as ſuch, are come in ſince the fall; and faith and Goſpel-obedience are all in man moſt eminently. But that the imaginations, thinkings, and conceivings muſt be ſhut out alſo, is a moſt abſurd notion. What! muſt we pray, and neither conceive nor think what we are to do, what we ought to do, nor how to expreſs our ſelves? no, nor while we are praying? Muſt all be done, as if man in his faculties of conceiving, knowing, were not Gods? nor to be concerned in his worſhip? Certainly, if nothing of man, ſoul or body, be active therein, man doth not worſhip God, nor pray at all, and ſo God worſhips himſelf; which is the true reſult of the Quakers Tenets.
But let us conſider a Text or two out of the Word § 4 Job 23. 4.of God. I would order my cauſe before him, and fill my mouth with arguments. The word Order, in the Heb. fignifies a marſhalling his words. Prayer is not only a Petition, but a humble pleading, wreſtling with God: and ſure there was ſomewhat of Job in ordering his cauſe and he uſed his ſpiritual skill in it: 'Tis render'd by Arias Montanus, diſponerem, I would diſpoſe my cauſe. Give ear to my words, O Lord. WhatPſal, 5, 1. 1 Cor, 14, 15. is it then? I will pray with the ſpirit, and I will pray with the underſtanding alſo, &c. Here is Paul's will in prayer, I will: and here is Paul's underſtanding alſo exerciſed in prayer, verſ. 15. But my underſtanding is unfruitful; which he blames as a companion of prayer, that being ſuppoſed. Thus I have proved the Quakers denying Goſpel-prayer in this reſpect above mentioned, and reproved their Anti-Goſpel-notions by the Scriptures.
Laſtly, They own no prayer but what is by the light, and in the light within. And the prayers of § 5 Smith Cat. p. 112.ſuch only are accepted, and not the prayers of thoſe who think to be heard for their much babling, who have many words, but not in the life. So that their prayers only are acceptable who pray in the life, (that is, with the Quakers, by the motions of their light within) and although we are far from thinking to be heard, for the ſake of much better things than much babling; yet all the words of prayer that are not qualified by their principle, the light within, is in their account but babling.
For it's truth in the inward parts he ſeeks for, wherein Naylor Love to loſt p. 16.none of you can worſhip, who know not the living Word in your hearts, to keep them up to God in your worſhip; and that worſhip which is not in the will of God, is the worſhipping of Devils.
If you ask any of them, What is the truth in the inward parts? They will not anſwer, it is ſincerity, meanings ſuitable to our expreſſions, and appearances; but it is Chriſt the light within, who is the truth. And for knowing the living Word; it is of the ſame ſenſe, it is all but the light within every man, the Quakers Chriſt. And for the Will of God, that is nothing but the immediate life and motions of the light within. I have ſaid enough out of their Writings to prove theſe things, neither will they deny them: but Naylor telleth you (and it is not for any Quaker to reſiſt the Spirit by which he ſpake) that worſhip not thus qualified, is the worſhipping of Devils.
It may be ſome of the Quakers, though they know in their conſciences that I ſpeak but the very truth of their Tenets and Notions, will ſay, I put my meanings to their words: but if they will but bate me ſpeaking from their light within, which they hold neceſſary to qualifie a man to ſpeak truly, I dare undertake to expound, according to their meaning, their ill-meant phraſes, as well as the moſt of them, and their myſtery is none to me at all. And although they talk of praying in the Name of Chriſt, yet as Naylor phraſes it, That is done in the Name of Chriſt, which is done in his Light and Power. But when all is done, this Chriſt, and Name, and Light, and Power, is but the light within, and its teachings and motions.
It is to me reported on all hands, that they never § 5 pray in the Name of Chriſt as their Mediator; much leſs then do they pray to God, in, or in the Name of Jeſus of Nazareth, the Son of Mary; or of that one Mediator between God and Men, the Man Chriſt Jeſus; even that Jeſus who was Crucified at Jeruſalem between two Thieves, above 1600 years ſince. I have put this to many of them, and they denied not this Charge; neither can I ſee how they can pray to the Father in the Name of Chriſt, ſeeing God the Father, and Chriſt (with them) admit of no diſtinction; and for the Man Chriſt that was born of Mary, they have nothing to do with him. The Apoſtle ſaith, A Mediator is not of one, but God is one. And whoever they are that deny and diſown prayer in the Name of Chriſt, are far from owning the Goſpel-Ordinance of prayer.
Reading the Scriptures, and Meditation, which are Goſpel-Ordinances, SECT. IV they alſo deny.
I need not tell you of the contempt they put upon the Scripture as a dead Letter, the carnal Letter; and on thoſe who attend to it, as dry Letter-mongers. Take only one inſtance of William Pens; But all muſt W. P. Spirit of truth.be as unlearned as from their firſt Birth, Education, and Traditional read knowledge, as he is unmanned; that is, again become a little child, before the ſecrets of Gods work come to be made known. And Fiſher calls ſtudying the Scripture, ſcraping in the Scripture. I wonder wherefore God ordered and commanded them to be written, if they are not to be read and ſtudied?
The Spirit of Chriſt within, is the end of the Tables, Great myſtery, p. 32. William Deusbuty Return, p. 7.Law, Works, and Books, and the Law is now in the heart. Whatever thou be, whether a Teacher of others, or a Profeſſor of what thou comprehends to be truth from the Letter of the Scripture, under what form, name, or title ſoever thou be, thou art a dead man, and a dead woman, and the wrath of God abides on thee, though thou ſee it not, Rom. 7. 9. Miſerable man! that talks at this rate, and will father it on the Scripture too, and ſuch a one as is directly againſt him. But we have had enough of this ſmoak.
I ſhall ſay ſomewhat of their abundant ſcorn of SECT. V of the Lords Supper, and Baptiſm; wherein they expreſs a ſuperfluity of naughtineſs, not only in their Tenets, but down-right railing.
The Ordinances I have hitherto conſidered in particular, are called Moral, from their natural obligation, although that ſubſtantial and Eſſential part, and qualification of them, their reſpect to a Mediator, will require a denomination more Evangelical, and without which we cannot call them Goſpel, or Chriſtian-Ordinances. Thoſe two Goſpel-Ordinances I come now to conſider, are purely and perfectly poſitive, and depend meerly upon Divinely-revealed Inſtitution, without which they had never come within our notice, nor had they been any way obliging to us.
Yet ſuch is the Sanction that the Lord hath put upon § 2 Inſtitutions of this nature, that not only ſince his revealed Law hath abounded to his Church, but alſo when the Revelation of his mind immediately to his Servants was very rare, he did not omit Injunctions of this kind. The Sacrifices we read of as early as Cain and Abel: Yea, Adam in his ſtate of Innocency, (who then needed not any indication of Moral duties, beyond what was within the reach of his natural, entire, and uncorrupted light, and innate to his perfect frame, and holy diſpoſition) had the obligation of a poſitive duty from God, in the matter of the Tree in the midſt of the Garden. And to me the main ground of it was, that the abſolute Soveraignty of the Creator might be acknowledged, and man might learn to render obedience to God, not only becauſe the matter of it is juſt in its ſelf, and would be ſo if God had never explicitely commanded it, but alſo becauſe it is the Will of God; yea, where his Will obliges ſingly, without the reſpect of natural and unchangeable Equity.
And God hath ſo expreſſed his jealouſie over this…. 3. right of his, that when ſins againſt not only natural light, but ſuperadded Precepts to confirm and ſtrengthen its doubtfulneſs and decays, have been paſſed by without any ſpecial expreſſions of his provocations, ſins committed againſt his poſitive Laws, have been avenged with a high hand. Adam's and Eve's tranſgreſſion was againſt an Inſtitution and poſitive Law, the Commiſſion of which ſo ſtirred up the diſpleaſure of God, that he baniſhed them out of Paradiſe, and impoſed that Curſe, under which the World groans to this day. And it is not below our notice, that although they were capable of ſinning againſt God in many other reſpects, yet God affixes the direful penalty to this poſitive Law: In the day that thou 2, Gen, 17.eateſt thereof, thou ſhalt ſurely die.
The caſe of Nadab and Ahihu, when God bare § 4 witneſs againſt them from heaven, by conſuming them with fire, was as a Pillar of Salt to ſeaſon others with an awful Reverence of God in his purely inſtituted worſhip. Ʋzzah was ſmitten, and died on the ſpot, when he miſcarried ſo little, as in ſinning againſt a poſitive Law, by putting forth his hand to ſave the Ark, the intention of it being good and commendable. And as under the Old ſo under the New-Teſtament-Diſpenſation, God hath not left his poſitive Laws without the fence of his ſpecial diſpleaſure witneſſed againſt the contemners and abuſers of them: For this cauſe many are weak and ſickly 1, Cor, 11, 30,among you, and many ſleep; that is, are dead, turned into the grave. This was inflicted on them for their diſorder at the Lords Supper: although (eſpecially among the Corinthians) we read of many great ſins againſt Moral Precepts, yet the Spirit of God aſſigns not them, but this breach as the cauſe.
And if we conſider the great inclination of man, § 5 to pride himſelf in his own innate reaſon and wiſdom, and great unwillingneſs to ſubſcribe to any thing, that is not in its own nature within the reach of it; we may ſuppoſe, that ſomething with reſpect to th…t, (which is ſo apt to break the bonds of meer Authority, even that of God himſelf) the Lord hath put ſuch a guard on poſitive Laws, and will not, no not now under the Diſpenſation of the gracious Goſpel, leave men without a Teſt of their Reſignation to his Divine Wi…dom, and abſolute (though never unjuſt) Soveraignty and Authority. And I having obſerved theſe Ordinances of the Goſpel, (which are the only meerly poſitive Laws of the New Teſtament) to be ſlighted, becauſe in their own nature they ſeem of no tendency to edification, have given my Reader this (not ſuperfluous) Introduction.
I ſhall begin with Baptiſm, it being the firſt in order of the two, both in its Inſtitution and Practice. The Quakers deny Water-Baptiſm, to be now an Ordinance or Chriſt. The Baptiſm we own, which Parnel's Shield of the Truth, p. 11.is the Baptiſm of Chriſt with the Holy Ghoſt, and with fire, but we deny all ot…er. Here is Water-Baptiſm plainly denied. But this will not ſerve the turn, it muſt be ſtigmatized alſo, with all thoſe who ever ſo conſcientiouſly and regularly practiſe it. And now I p. 12.ſee the other [Water-Baptiſm] to be formal imitation, and the invention of man, and ſo a meer deluſion, and all are Heathens, and no Chriſtians, who cannot witneſs this Baptiſm, [the Baptiſm of the Quakers ſpirit of Deluſion] who can witneſs this, denies all other.Farnſworth againſt S…alham.
Your Brain-imaginations we deny.
Methinks they who have read the Scripture, ſhould not call Water-Baptiſm the invention of men, that is too palpable an untruth; though to call it § 2 Formal Imitation be an untruth alſo, it is more tollerable than the other: but to brand it with the charge of a meer Deluſion, is of ſuch reflection on its Author, as nothing but a heart Steel-hard, and a head Dungeon dark, and both void of the fear and awe of God, could thus ſuggeſt. And to make up the meaſure full, all muſt be reproached as Heathens, and no Chriſtians, whoſe eyes are not as blind, and foreheads as impudent as theirs; and yet as rank Quakers as this, will call me not only injurious, but a Blaſphemer alſo, for ſaying and proving they are no Chriſtians. But lies and confidence with them are prerogativ'd things, while Truth muſt beg, and have nothing but by their good leave and grace, and then it may ſtarve, or flee where the Quakers rule the roaſt.
They [Baptiſm, Bread, and Wine] roſe from the § 3 Smith prim. p. 39.Popes invention; and the whole practice of thoſe things, as they uſe them, had their inſtitution from the Pope, &c. Without doubt the light within is wonderfully learned in Hiſtory, and (as ſome of the Quakers write) doth declare to them the Creation, the Fall, and what not, without the Scripture? This regardful Prophet can tell you, that Baptiſm roſe from theIt was that which by the Pope and Popiſh affected Prieſts was ordained, and by ſuch it is upheld to this day. Higgins Warning. p. 5. §. 4. Parnel Shield of the truth. p. 11. Pope, yea, and the Wine in the Sacrament too, which the Pope indeed took away from the Laity, but never inſtituted it. And this Author, as I have before cited him, tells the world, we call the Latine the Original: his mind is all on Rome, and there I'le leave him. Yet that I may not imitate the Quakers, who will not conſider the weightieſt reaſons, and cleareſt againſt their Tenets, I ſhall weigh theirs truly and juſtly, before I determine this point.
They who would have one Baptiſm inward, another outward, would have two Baptiſms, when the Scripture ſaith, the Baptiſm is but one. I muſt tell him, by the way, that he tells an untruth wilfully, and what that is he could tell another. He uſes (or rather abuſes) the words of the Apoſtle juſt before repeated, One Lord, one Faith, one Baptiſm; and there he adds his but, which the Text hath not. And here the Scripture ſaith, the Baptiſm is but one; let him find ſuch a Scripture, and I will be bound to turn Quaker: But there being no ſuch, I am ſure he hath not the Spirit of God, and is by it infallibly guided, who thus forges Scripture. But to the Objection, take notice, that Water-Baptiſm is the ſign, the Baptiſm of the Spirit the main thing (but not all) ſignified: now to have the thing ſignifying, and the thing ſignified, called by the ſame name, doth not make them to be two of that name, no more than there were two new Covenants, becauſe the matter contained in the Covenant is called the Covenant, Heb. 8. 10. And Circumciſion, the ſign of the Covenant, is called the Covenant alſo, Gen. 17. 13. He that is born in thy houſe, and he that is bought with thy money, muſt need be circumciſed, and my Covenant ſhall be in your fleſh for an everlaſting Covenant.
Moreover, Baptiſm with water is Baptiſm in a proper ſenſe, Baptiſm of or with the Spirit, but Analogically ſo called, as having in it ſomething a likeneſs to, or proportion with it. foreign from foreign, ſignifies waſhing with water, dipping into water properly; that of the Spirit, waſhing the ſoul but improperly, for freeing it from ſinful pollutions. Therefore this Objection is a meer fancy, and they that will contemn the Deeds and Seal, becauſe they are Paper, and Ink, and Wax, and caſt them away, may loſe Land and all for their contempt, and then they will pay for, and repent of their folly.
Another ground for denying it is, it was not laid § 5 Naylor Love to the loſt. p.on the Apoſtle of neceſſity, but as they found it of ſervice, or diſ-ſervice. This is to be underſtood only of Paul, who in his Call (which was out of due time, and in an extraordinary manner) had not this of Baptizing mentioned, as the reſt had: therefore he ſaid, Chriſt ſent me not to baptize, but to preach the 1 Cor. 1. 17Goſpel: Yet he did baptize, therefore it was an Ordinance; and that he baptized ſo few in that Country, it was rather Providential than deſigned by Paul: for he being ſo famous an Inſtrument of converting the Gentiles, they began to cry him up as if he had not been Chriſts Miniſter, but rather his Competitor; and therefore he thanks God he baptized no more, leſt they ſhould have ſaid he baptized in his own name. But though he did not baptize, there might be enough beſide for that work; and we read not of one that omitted it, when they underſtood of the Ordinance, and had any to adminiſter it to them.
Object. It was to confer the Holy Ghoſt. § 6
That was but one conſequence, but not what Baptiſm▪ ſignified: Beſide, the giving the Holy Ghoſt was of a miraculous nature for the Confirmation of the Diſciples in the newneſs of the Chriſtian Religion, and conviction of others: and the friends of Cornelius had the Holy Ghoſt before Baptiſm.
Object. None were called to baptize, but thoſe that § 7 were ſent to preach to all Nations.
Anſw. Ananias baptized Paul, yet was not ſo ſent. The ends of Baptiſm, which was a ſign and ſeal of what intereſt they had in Chriſt, and of Regeneration, and the righteouſneſs of Faith remain; and therefore that remains to be diſpenſed by the ordinary and mediate Officers of the Church, who are Stewards of the Myſteries of God, of which this is one. It being alſo a Cognizance of Chriſtianity, there is the ſame reaſon for it, and it is in vain to talk of Ordinances aboliſhed, without ſome proof, when, and why they are ſo. Naylor ſaith, Paul preached the Love to loſt p. 41.Baptiſm of the Spirit in its ſtead. Let that be proved, and ſomething is ſaid.
But John Higgins ſaith, That Water-Baptiſm was Warning, &c. p. 5.but the adminiſtration of John, is known and confeſſed. I ſay no more to him, but I perceive he is but little acquainted with Confeſſions.
I muſt bring in the ſentence of the great PatriarchGeat myſtery of great Whore. p. 65. §. 8. George Fox to decide all; for, after his words, 'tis not fit any of his inferiours ſhould ſpeak again: Where was Matthew, or Mark, or Luke, or John baptized? and many more which the Apoſtle Paul thanked God he had not baptized? Baptizing is making Diſciples to the Lord Jeſus, and baptizing them into his Name, that is, his Power;—but he [Paul] told of the Spirits Baptiſm, and brought the Saints off from the things that are ſeen; and Water is ſeen, and its Baptiſm.
Strange arguments! as if the Command, and abundant inſtances of its practice had no force, unleſs we have an account where every Believer was baptized; and becauſe Paul did not baptize all, therefore they were not baptized at all. But for Baptiſm being a making Diſciples, if it be underſtood of Water-Baptiſm, it will be no ſmall friend to Infant-Baptiſm: if of the Baptiſm of the Spirit, I ſuppoſe George Fox will eat his words again, and acknowledge that the Apoſtles had not power to beſtow the Spirit of God on perſons, and make them new Creatures, that was the miſtake of Simon Magus, and now of George Fox.
But the laſt argument is ſuch an one as never offered § 9 it ſelf to ſuch a ſervice, till the Quakers light (which they ſay is Almighty) had the management of it, and ſo may make an effectual inſtrument of any thing. Paul brought the Saints off from the things that are ſeen, and Water is ſeen, and its Baptiſm. He2 Cor. 4. 18. that ſhall look into the Text to which his words refer, will admire his ſharp-piercing Genius, or his non-ſuch ignorance, that could find ſuch a meaning of that Text, or tell the world it was there. But if all that is ſeen muſt be caſt away and rejected, I counſel the Quakers not to be ſuch eager purſuers of the world, and that I dare ground upon the Text: But (above all) to reject their proud dreaming intolerable notions, the ignorance and deluſion of which is ſo groſs, that it is not only ſeen, but may be felt alſo. But for all this, the Quakers will affirm they own Baptiſm, and believe that George Fox is ſent of God, becauſe he ſpeaks of the Scripture right as they are.
The Quakers diſown the Ordinance of the Lords Supper, SECT. VII to be now a Goſpel-Ordinance, or any Ordinance of God at all.
As of Baptiſm, ſo of the Lords Supper; they will ſay they own it, (at leaſt many of them) but they call quite another thing by that name, which is the way they have to delude people in all other matters of the1 Cor. 11. 23. Chriſtian Religion. If what the Apoſtle Paul ſaith he received of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11. 23. do expreſs the true Lords Supper, the Quakers deny it.
Feeding upon the husk and ſhadow, which is carnal. Parnel Shield of the truth, p. 13.For the bread which the World [all that are not Quakers] breaks, is natural and carnal—ſo alſo the Cup which they drink; and here is no communion but natural, outward, and carnal.
They [Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper] are Smith prim p. 39.the Popes invention.—The Prieſt gives it to the people, and tells them, it is the Bloud of Chriſt which is ſhed for them, when it is Wine, and not Bloud. I will not trouble thee with ſo unneceſſary a thing, as a reply to theſe ſilly Cavils, and plain contradictions to the Scripture.
The main Objection the Quakers have againſt this § 2 Ordinance (beſide that againſt all forms, and all things that are ſeen) is, That Chriſt is c…me, and his Diſciples were to do it in remembrance of him till he was come; but Chriſt is come in the Spirit to them, and therefore this Precept doth not bind them. But who would think the Spirit, or Chriſt in the Spirit, was not come (either in ſhedding it abroad miraculouſly, as in the 2 Acts) or as a Sanctifier (in the hearts of his people) when the Diſciples, and whole Church at Jeruſalem, were ſo frequent in this Ordinance; and when the Apoſtle Paul tells the Corinthians, The 1 Cor. 1…. 16.Bread which we break, &c. But that none muſt be ingaged by this Ordinance, but thoſe to whom Chriſt was not come by a Spirit of Sanctification, is exceeding groſs: For whereas the Ordinance is for the Saints, this renders it to be peculiar to thoſe in a ſtate of ſin, and unconverted to Chriſt; and they are not aſhamed to own it to be ſo.
Which was the thing Chriſt in tender love to his Diſciples, Naylor love to the loſt. p. 58.at his departure, warned them on, knowing that their nature would draw to the Earth-ward, not yet being changed, nor having Chriſt born in them to keep them; and for all this Warning, and leaving this as a Sign, &c. If Chriſt born in the ſoul, be not till the light within be obeyed as Chriſt the Son of the living God, we doubt not the truth of Nailor's ſpeech: and that the Apoſtles and Diſciples of Chriſt were all ſtrangers to ſuch a Converſion.
Before I part with this Subject, it will not be unmeet § 3 to inform you, what they mean by the Lords Supper which they own.
But if you eat in remembrance of him, and ſo come to die to that which ſlew him, then do you ſhew the Lords p. 57. Naylor Love to the loſt.death till he come; and when he comes, he ſhall not find you eating and drinking with the drunken, &c. So that mortification to ſin (taken in the beſt ſenſe) is with him the Lords Supper; but in his own ſenſe, it is a dying to all that doth not obey the Chriſt of the Quakers, [The light within.]
At another turn it is ſomewhat elſe, and quitep. 56. contrary: Which all know who come to his Supper, where the Father and the Son are come in, and ſup with the Creature, which all the Imitators and Obſervers of times are ignorant of, whoſe contention is about outſides. In the words cited before, it was a Faſt, a Popiſh cruciating Faſt: But this laſt cited a Feaſt, a Spiritual Feaſt; and the Feaſt is conſtituted of the coming of the Father and the Son ſupping with the Creature: whereas before his mind was, that when Chriſt comes, the Supper is ended; but now it is no other but Chriſt himſelf preſent. But the ſtrangeſt Supper of the Lord is expreſſed by the ſame Author, in theſeP. 54. words: And this was to be done at all ſeaſons, when they eat and drink; in their eating and drinking they were to do it to the Lord, and therein to have Communion with his Body and Bloud;—yea, when they were to eat with Gentiles, they were to partake of the Table of the Lord, as is plain, 1 Cor. 10.
Thus hath the Lord given up theſe people to confuſion. § 4 Sometimes the Lords Supper is quite gone, and done away; then it remains, but 'tis a faſting from, and dying to ſin, and what they call Exceſs.
Then it is Spiritual and within, and Chriſts coming makes the Supper. And laſt of all, 'tis every meal you eat, and every draught you drink, you ought therein to remember the Lords death till he come, at breakfaſt, dinner, ſupper, and afternoons luncheons alſo. And yet this Wretch Nailor (to whom ſome of the Quakers ſang Hoſanna, and worſhipped him, and calle… him the Son of God, The Chriſt; and none of the Quakers now, that I can hear of, but own him as a great Prophet, and highly honoured and beloved of God) and yet he dared to ſay concerning this falſe confuſed ſtuff, What I have received of the Lord, that p. 56.I ſhall declare unto you. And again, And this is known from the Lord in the Eternal, to be the true end of the p. 57.Supper of the Lord, &c. If denying the Ordinances of Chriſt, after the manner proved of the Quakers in this Chapter, be Chriſtianity, or conſiſtent with a Chriſtian, the holy Scriptures have given us a very unintelligible account of Chriſtianity, or a Chriſtian: And that mouth (which ſaid, I deny that God did ever, Ch▪ Atkinſon.or will ever reveal himſelf, by any of thoſe things th…u calleſt the means of Grace) was not full of blaſphemy, or in any fault againſt Scripture▪ Prayer, Hearing, which were intended by it.