The Snake in the Grass Further Discovered, Part 2 · Chapter 16
CHAP. XVI.
The Quakers are groſs Idolaters; and Quakeriſm groſs Idolatry.
THere have been great Conteſts in the world, SECT. I about the imputation of this Character of Idolaters, and what is Idolatry? Some have contended, That not only a falſe worſhip (though of the true God) is Idolatry, and by conſequence that thoſe who live in the practice of ſuch a worſhip are Idolaters; but alſo that any Appendices to that worſhip of God (which in the ſubſtance of it is true worſhip) are alſo Idolatry, being of mans invention, and added by his own proper Authority, as a part of divine worſhip: and that ſo doing is a crime againſt the ſecond Commandment in the Decalogue, or ten words, or Commandments written in tables of ſtone.
The proof of my Charge againſt the Quakers, will not depend upon ſuch nice and diſputable premiſes, but if there be any ſuch thing as Idolatry in the whole world, I ſhall prove them guilty in the higheſt degree. And becauſe this Charge looks very big, and would be no ſmall ſin againſt both the principles and perſons of thoſe concerned, if untrue; and alſo that ſuch a crime of theirs is not ſo viſible to the world, as may be within the cognizance and notice of all who converſe with them: I ſhall diſpoſe my Argument plainly and formally.
All thoſe that own and profeſs that to be God which is § 2 not God, are groſs Idolaters. But the Quakers own and profeſs that to be God which is not God: Therefore, the Quakers are groſs Idolaters.
My ſecond proof is in this Argument.
All thoſe who worſhip that as God (profeſſedly, and according to their profeſſed principles) which is not God, are groſs Idolaters. But the Quakers do ſo: Therefore they are groſs Idolaters.
My firſt Argument I ſhall firſt proſecute, and with that perſpicuity, as will be apparent to all that are not more blind than Bats. For the firſt Propoſition, viz. That all thoſe that own and profeſs that to be God which is not God, are groſs Idolaters. I know none but will grant the truth of it, who (in matters of a religious nature) can diſcern their right hands from their left. The Minor or ſecond propoſition of my Syllogiſm, I am concerned to confirm. Here will be the iſſue depending; and if this be throughly proved, no man convinced thereof, but will ſit down by the concluſion, That the Quakers are groſs Idolaters.
I ſhall manage my proof of this by theſe two § 3 Syllogiſms.
They who own and profeſs the light within every man to be God, own and profeſs that to be God, which is not God: But the Quakers do own and profeſs the light within every man to be God: Therefore, The Quakers own and profeſs that to be God which is not God.
Again, They that own and profeſs the ſouls or ſpirits of all or ſome men, which are conſtitutive parts of all or ſome men, to be God, do own and profeſs that to be God which is not God: But the Quakers do own and profeſs ſo; Therefore, They own and profeſs that to be God which is not God.
The firſt Syllogiſm I ſhall manage in the firſt place, the Major and Minor of which I ſhall fully prove. And although ſome have attempted the conviction of the Quakers, by ſhewing the natural faculties of light in man, to be far ſhort of what they aſcribe to it, I ſhall not go their way to work; for ſo long as the Quakers hold their light within to be Chriſt or God, 'tis vain to reſtrain it to leſs than infinite. And I having to do with thoſe, whoſe opinion of the light within depends on ſuch a conceit, I ſhall prove the light within every man not to be Chriſt or God. For the proof of the firſt propoſition, I muſt prove, That the light within every man is not God: and in ſo doing, all that is requiſite to the firſt propoſition will be diſcharged. § 4
That the light within every man is not God▪ I prove thus:
That which hath not power in it to diſpoſe and order Arg. 1 the wayes of a man is not God: But the light within every man hath not power in it to diſp…ſe of the wayes of a man: Therefore, It is not God.
The firſt Propoſition will be granted by all who § 5 own the omnipotence of God: take away that and you un-God him.
The ſecond Propoſition I prove from J…r. 10. 23. O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himſelf, it is not in man that walketh to direct his ſteps. If it be not in man, it is not within man: I cannot ſay that to be within me, that is not in me; though that may be ſaid to be in me, that is not a part of me. So then, if the prophet Jeremy were not miſtaken, there is nothing in man, or within man, that hath the power to diſpoſe or wiſdome to direct his ſteps; but he may either fail in directing unwiſely, or for want of power to perform what is well directed or determined: Therefore I muſt conclude againſt the Quakers, That the light in every man is not God. Arg. . § 6
That which is not infinite and immenſe, or without or beyond meaſure, is not God: But the light within every man is not infinite and immenſe, or beyond meaſure Therefore, The light within every man is not God.
The firſt propoſition I prove from Pſal. 47. 5. Great is our Lord, and of great power; his underſtanding is infinite. To ſay, That which is infinite is not beyond meaſure, is a contradiction in it ſelfe. The ſecond propoſition I prove by their own conceſſion; and grant, There is ſcarcely any one thing more frequent in their Writings, than to talk of the meaſure of God, the meaſure of Chriſt, the meaſure of the light in men. But turn your ear inward, to that meaſure …arnel's Shield of the truth. P. … 2.of light in you. I could fill a volume with Inſtances of this nature, how they meaſure out the light within and Chriſt, and God, and the Spirit: but none of them will deny this.
It is a horible abomination, for men through their groſs and dark conceits thus to diſhonour God; to ſhare him into more and leſs degrees and meaſures, who is intire, infinite, indiviſible; who is not (with reſpect to his Being leſs in one place than in another. This meaſuring would agree well to his manifeſtations, and diſcoveries of himſelf to his creatures, and by his works: it would agree well to thoſe graces wrought by his Spirit in the hearts of his people which in ſome is more, in ſome leſs, and capable of growing in all; b…t God cannot be more or leſs than he is, and ever was.
That which may be darkneſs in a ſinful and evil ſenſe, § 7. Arg. 3.(and that in the abſtract) cannot be God: But the light within ſome men, may be darkneſs in a ſinful and evil ſenſe (in the abſtract) Therefore, The light within every man is not God.
I ſuppoſe, and hope they are not yet arrived to that height of wickedneſs as to charge God with ignorance or ſin in the leaſt degree, or that he is capable of ſo degenerating: therefore I will take the firſt propoſition for granted.
For the ſecond, I ſhall prove from Scripture, Eph. 5. 8. For ye were ſometimes darkneſs, but now are ye light in the Lord. What can be more excluſive of all ſpiritual light or light in ſpiritual things, than to be darkneſs in the very abſtract? But if you who adore the light within, ſhall ſay, this is meant of man, but the light within is God, and Chriſt; and that is not man, of whom the Apoſtle ſpeaks. I Anſwer, That ſometimes you plead hard, that the lighteth in Joh. 1. 9. ſhould be rendred enlightneth; and W. P. tugs hard for it, in his pamphlet called, The Spirit of Truth, &c. But it will be granted with leſs ado. Well than, if the light within every man be the enlightning of every man, (at leaſt virtually) ſo that if he be willing to be guided by its conduct, it will lead him as you dream; then it muſt be within him, as a qualification of his conſcience▪ though it be not produced into exerciſe. And you tell men, they have that within them, that will be a ſufficient guide, if they will but liſten to it: therefore this Text reaches the light within you, which ſaith, there was a time when they were darkneſs. It would be a ſtrange affirmation, to ſay, the world or Creation were darkneſs, while the body of the Sun were in it ſhining, although not one man ſhould move by its light. And it is worth the noting, that foreign in the Text rendred darkneſs, ſignifies ſuch a darkneſs, as is the total abſence of light.
A ſecond Scripture that proves this, is Mat. 6. 23. § 8 But if the light that is in thee be darkneſs, how great is that darkneſs! It is the ſame word in the Greek, as in the fore▪ cited Scripture. And leſt you ſhould cavil, and ſay, Chriſt doth but ſuppoſe it, he doth not affirm that the light in any one is darkneſs; the foregoing Verſe tells you, That if thine eye be evil, (that is, not ſingle and ſincere in its aims) thy whole body ſhall be full of darkneſs. And ſure you will not ſay, but there are many in the world whoſe eyes are evil, who account all ſuch that are not Quakers. And it may be conſidered, that where the whole body is full of darkneſs, there cannot poſſibly be in it any light. And that this which men conceit to be light, and are conducted and led by it, as if it were ſuch, is ſinfull ignorance and darkneſs; I ſhall not think it calls for proof. Well then, 'tis as clear as day, that the beſt light ſome men have within them, is but perfect night: therefore it cannot be God.
Thus I have proved by three Arguments, That the Arg. 4 light within every man is not God. I will but name a few more, and leave them to the judgment of the Reader, without further proof. That which may be kept under, and in captivity by the luſts of men, is not God: But the light in ſome men (not only) may be (but) is kept under and in captivity by the luſts of men, (and that by the Quakers own confeſſion:) Therefore, The light in every man is not God.
That which may be crucified, and put to pain in Arg. 4 a proper ſenſe, is not God: But the light within every man (which the Quakers call God) may (by their own confeſſion) be put to pain and crucified, and that in a proper ſenſe; (or they talk but madly of being ſaved by its being crucified within them) Therefore, It is not God.
I proceed to the proof of the Minor, or § 10 ſecond Propoſition: Viz. That the Quakers do own and profeſs the light within every man to be God. This I muſt prove from their own Writings; which will eaſily be done, it being the grand foundation of the whole Fabrick of Quakeriſm: ſo that I may ſay, its firſt ſtone is laid in groſs Idolatry. It would be needleſsmorning Watch p. 5. 6. 7. is filled with this Sub…ect to bring Inſtances of their aſſerting the light in every man, to be that Word which John ſpeaks of, John. 1. 1. Which was in the beginning, which was with God, which was God. It is the firſt thing they teach, and that not ſuddenly and amphibiouſly (as they do many other points) but in ſo many words.
But I ſhall furniſh you with proofs enough, over § 11 Fox the younger, p. 53.and above that. I will make you know that I the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world, that all through me ſhould believe, am the true eternal God, which created all things; that by me the light all things are upheld, and that there is not another beſides me can ſave. Although in this paſſage he doth not call it the light in every man, yet it being a perſonating the light within in a large and continued diſcourſe, he doth often expreſs it the light within; as in pag. 50. You ſcorn me the light in you. Pag. 54. Which will not own me the light in them. All power in Smith prim.Heaven and Earth is in it; [the light in the conſcience.]
They that cannot read out of theſe paſſages, (and § 12 that without ſpelling) that the Quakers own and profeſs the light in every man to be God, are not like to be much the wiſer for whatever they read. That it is in every one, hear one ſpeak his mindLip of Truth, &c. p. 45. who would be believed; Light is the ſame in him that hates it, and in him that loves it. I have done with the firſt grand Argument, and proved abundantly, that the light within every man is not God. That the Quakers own the light within every man to be God and profeſs it. And theſe will prove that they are Idolaters; or none will ever be ſo proved.
I ſhall now ſhew you another God of the Quakers SECT II owning, or at leaſt their Idol in another dreſs; in manageing the ſecond proof of the Quakers, owning that to be God which is not God. My Argument is this.
They that own and profeſs the ſouls or ſpirits of all or ſome men, (which are conſtitutive parts of all or ſome men) to be God, do own and profeſs that to be God which is not God. But the Quakers do ſo: Therefore, They own and profeſs that to be God which is not God.
Two things will prove the whole of this Syllogiſm. Firſt, To prove that the ſouls or ſpirits of any men are not God. Why I put in all or ſome in the propoſition, you will ſee the reaſon, when I prove, Secondly; That the Quakers hold the ſpirits or ſouls of all or ſome men to be God.
If the ſouls or ſpirits of any men were God, then God Arg. 1 may be polluted with ſia: But God cannot be polluted with ſin: Therefore, The ſouls or ſpirits of any men are not God.
The ſecond Propoſition will be granted, not only § 2 Rom 3. 5. Job▪ 40. 2.by Chriſtians but Heathens. Is there unrighteouſneſs with God who taketh vengeance—God forbid. He that reproveth God, let him anſwer it. The firſt Propoſition I prove from Adam's pollution with ſin, who of all men (except Jeſus Chriſt) was the moſt unlikely to have his ſoul polluted; who was created upright, and had the greateſt advantages of maintaining his innocency; yet his ſoul was polluted, as may appear, Gen. 3. Rom. 5. At large. Let us cleanſe our ſelves 2 Cor. 7. 1.from all filthineſs, both of fleſh and ſpirit. Now the God of peace ſanctifie you wholly, and preſerve you blameleſs in ſpirit, and ſoul and body, &c.
This is enough to prove that the ſpirits of men yea of the Saints and beſt of men, may be and have been polluted with ſin.
If the ſouls or ſpirits of men were God, then God Arg. 2 may be in priſon. But God cannot be in priſon: Therefore, They are not God.
The firſt Propoſition I prove from 1 Pet. 3. 19. By § 3 which he went and preached to the ſpirits in priſon. And theſe were the ſinful and diſobedient ſpirits, who provoked God in the dayes of Noah. The ſecond Propoſition all men will grant, except the Quakers, who often ſpeak of the ſeed in captivity; by which ſeed they mean no other but Chriſt or God within every man, or the light within every man. Arg. 3 § 4
If the ſpirits or ſ…uls of men were God, then God might be condemned: But God cannot ſo be: Therefore, The ſpirits or ſouls of men are not God.
That the ſpiri…s or ſouls of men may be ſo, (I tremble to write the word) appears by that Text 1 Pet. 3. 19. The diſobedient ſpirits in the dayes of Noah are now in priſon, which is a part of their torment. The whole current of the Goſpel ſaith it, or implies it.
I ſhall now prove out of the Quakers chief and allowed Writers, whom they account infallible, and SECT. III honour with their chief reſpects; that they hold the ſpirits or ſouls of men, or both, to be God. Every man hath that which is one in union, and like the Spirit of E. B. True Faith, &c.Chriſt; even as good as the Spirit of Chriſt, according to its meaſure. This he ſpeaks of the Spirit in man, which every man hath; and ſure if it be as good as the Spirit of Chriſt, it muſt be God, for the Spirit of Chriſt and of God are one and the ſame. But to talk of its meaſure (their uſual phraſe) is a blaſpheming God, to ſpeak his divine Being any thing leſs than infinite
Now my ſoul and ſpirit is centered in its own Being with God, and this form of perſon muſt return from E. H. Teſtimony, &c.whence it was taken. The words of Ed. Burroughs the morning before he died. Here he makes his ſoul and ſpirit one Being with God, or God to be the ſouls own Being. And what follows implies, that as the body and ſoul are the form of man while in this world, ſo at diſſolution, as the body reſolves into duſt, its firſt Being, ſo the ſoul to God, its firſt Being. A miſerable Expoſition of the Scripture which ſaith, The body ſhall return to the duſt, and the ſpirit ſhall return to him that gave it. He lived and died a true Quakers, but a falſe Chriſtian, if he changed not his mind his laſt day.
Prieſt. It is an expreſſion of a dark deluded mind, to ſay, that God is not diſtinguiſhed from the Saints: § 2 Fox great myſtery, &c p. 16.Thus he brings in the miniſter ſaying. Anſw. But God and Chriſt is in the Saints, and dwells in them, and he [the Prieſt] is a reprobate, and out of the Apoſtles Doctrine. If it were only out of ignorance, in not underſtanding the word diſtinguiſhed, or of the manner of Gods Being in his Saints, it ſhould not be his Charge in this place. But you ſhall (if you read further) ſee he intends no leſs, than the wicked import of his words. But to call him reprobate, and out of the Apoſtles Doctrine, is over meaſure a great deal; he might have ſpared him that in charity.
John Bunion ſaith, He [God] is diſtinct from the Saints? and Bunian is deceived, who ſaith, he is diſtinct p. 16.from the Saints and ſo you are a company of pityful Teachers. By theſe expreſſions he renders not only the Souls and Spirits of the Saints the ſame being with God; but their whole man without diſtinction.
Again thou makes a great pudder, that any one ſhould witneſs he is equal with God. Anſw. A Catechiſm of § 3 the Aſſembly of the Prieſts, and put forth to the nation in which they have laid down—that the holy Ghoſt and the Son is equal in power and glory with the Father; Fox great myſteryyet if any come but to witneſs the Son revealed in him, or come to witneſs the Holy Ghoſt in them as they gave out the Scriptures, or witneſs the mind of Chriſt, and witneſs that equal with the Father, they cry out horrid blaſphemy. Obſerve, he doth not in the leaſt deny the prieſts charge (as he calls him) but calls it a pudder; he makes as if the moſt horrid blaſphemies oppoſed or charged on the blaſphemers, were but making a pudder. And to heal his ſore he would wound the aſſembly of Divines, by laying the like monſter at their door; but herein he ſhews his ignorance with his malice and ſlander: For the reſt of his phraſes I ſhall only ſay this, that they make no difference between the Spirit of the Quakers, yea of all men, and the Son of God, or the Holy Ghoſt.
And is not that of God, which comes out from God? § 4 is not that of his being, the ſoul which he hath in his Fox great Myſteryhand, and ſo divine? There is a great difference to be of God with reſpect to relation, or creation and to be of God, as of his being, or the ſame being with him; the one is common to the whole Creation (for of him are all things) the other is peculiar to the bleſſed Creator. Magnus Bine ſaith the Soul is not infinite in it ſelf, but Fox great myſtery p. 29is a Creature, and Richard Baxter ſaith it is a ſpiritual ſubſtance. Anſw. Now conſider what a Condition theſe called Miniſters are in, they ſay that which is a Spiritual ſubſtance is not infinite in it ſelf, but a creature; that which came out from the Creator, and is in the hand of the Creator, which brings it up; and to the Creator again, that is infinite in it ſelf, which the hand goes againſt him, that does evil, in which hand the Soul is which is immortal and infinite, which hand is infinite, which brings it up to God is infinite.
If any man can match the ignorance, confidence, blaſphemy and nonſence of this paſſage, out of the mouths or pens of any but the Quakers, he may be reckoned a great diſcoverer But this is received by thoſe poor deluded ſouls as infallibly true and divine myſtery (being the dictates of George▪ Fox) whom none of them dare or will contradict, ſuch is the ſtupendious captivity of theſe poor people.
Is not the Soul without beginning come from God? It is not horrid Blaſphemy to ſay the Soul is a part of God, for it § 5 Fox great myſterycame out of him, and that which came out of him is of him. Thus I have proved (not by remote conſequences but their open and plain aſſertions; and that pleaded for after their wild manner) hat they hold the Soul of Man to be God, apart of the Divine being, infinite in it ſelf, without beginning-part of the creator: here is enough of blaſphemy and idolatry for one author to fill the mouths of many. I ſhall cite yet more of them, that none may think it is but one Quaker (though I may ſtand for a thouſand) who is ſo prodigiouſly wicked.§ 6. Fiſher velata quaedam revelata p. 17.
And whereas you Querie; whether the ſaid Spirit [the Spirit of man] is mortal or immortal? I anſwer, it is immortal, and neither mortal nor corruptible; but the immortal and incorruptible ſeed of God, even ſomething of the living word, which is ſaid to be made fleſh. What the word is that was made fleſh John ſaith was God, 1. John. 1.
That which the Lord from Heaven begetteth of his own Penningtons Queſt. 27. Declaration againſt poverty query 27.image and likeneſs, of his own [ſubſtance] of his own ſeed, of his own Spirit and pure life; Speaking of the Saints the members of Chriſt. Whether do you wait and believe,—to have the ſame mind which was alſo in Chriſt Jeſus? who thought it no robbery to be equal with God. And Chriſt thought it no robbery to be equal with God; yet he was no Phariſee, though of the phariſees judged a blaſphemer, and as he is, ſo are we ſaith the Saints.—And they who dwell in the truth, witneſs Parnel Shield, &c p. 37.one with another; For the light of God owns its own, for God cannot deny himſelf.
They own the Spirit of God, Chriſt the ſeed, and the § 7 ſpirit of man, to be but one and the ſame thing; but ſome times will deny any to have a Spirit at all but the regenerate, that they may not ſay the unregenerate have the Spirit of God, or God the Spirit in them. See Fiſhers rare diſtinction to ſerve this turn.Fiſher velata quaedam revelata p 13
As to the Spirit of man,—which concurres to the conſtituting of man in his primitive perfection; it is the breath of life which God breathed into his Soul, after he had formed him as to his body of the duſt of the earth; whereby he came to be a living Soul, a Soul that did partake ſomething of Gods ovvn life,—this (Spirit of man) is that living principle of the divine nature, vvhichwhich man did before his degeneration., and ſhall g…vin after his regeneration partake of. This Charge being of ſo black and horrid a nature, I did not judge it unmeet to prove the truth of it by abounding inſtances; and now Reader judge, and put on the largeſt Charity that a man or Chriſtian ought in any caſe to exerciſe and give thy verdict, if I have not made appear That the Quakers are groſs Idolaters, ſo far as owning and profeſſing that to be God which is not God will contribute to a demonſtration.
I ſhall manage my ſecond grand argument but briefly, SECT. IV for the work I have done will render it not very incredible, that they ſhould worſhip a falſe God; ſeeing they own and profeſs a falſe God.
All thoſe who worſhip that as God (profeſſedly and according to their profeſſed Principles) which is not God are groſs idolaters. But the Quakers do ſo: Therefore, the Quakers are groſs idolaters.
I ſhall not prove the firſt propoſition, which none will deny. The ſecond I prove by their own conceſſion (conſidered with the proof I have made of the light within every man and the Souls and Spirits of men not to be God) but you may take the argument in this form.
All they who worſhip profeſſedly, and according to their § 2 profeſſed principles the light within every man, or the Souls and Spirits of any men as God, worſhip a falſe God. But ſo do the Quakers: Therefore they worſhip a falſe God.
Who are not ſprung from the noble gentle ſeed, and to thoſe honour is not due, neither can we bow unto Shield of the Truth, p. 25.them; for if we ſhould, we ſhould ſet the Devil in the room of God, and give unto him that which is due to God. So that to thoſe who are Quakers, and have the birth of the light within, the noble and gentle ſeed, (as they call it) to them (with reſpects to that) they may bow. And withal he tells you, it is ſuch a bowing as is peculiar to God; for where it is uſed to ſuch who have not God in them, (in the Quakers ſenſe) it is a ſetting the Devil in the room of God.
If it be objected, that they bow to none: I anſwer, § 3 that they pretend to own no worſhip but what is inward, and yet they pretend to worſhip God, and meet to that end; ſo that if they worſhip this Light Within, this Soul or Spirit in any men, as they profeſs to worſhip God, they give them or it Divine Worſhip. There was a time when many gave honor and worſhipJohn Bolton Senior. to James Naylor; one (now a grand Quaker) not being then pleaſed with it, James told him, that if they did it to him as a Man, he diſowned it; but if they did it to the Light Within him, he accepted it: If any doubt of the truth of this, the Proceſs againſt him in Richards Parliament will prove it. And John Bolton the Elder, the Quaker I ſpeak of, can tell you more of it; and I doubt not but that for the reproach, and worſe things which would follow it, we ſhould ſoon find it a general practiſe with the Quakers, to give viſible worſhip to the Gods that dwell in the Temples of each others Carcaſes. But I proceed to further proof.
He that will worſhip Chriſt in his fulneſs (in the Majeſty Penningtons queſtions, &c. p. 24.of his Glory, Dominion, and Power) muſt learn to bow down at the loweſt appearances of his Light and Spirit, even at the feet of Jeſus. He calls it worſhip, by Chriſt they all mean the Light Within, and the loweſt appearances muſt be bowed at, which is the leaſt meaſure of the Light Within.
Prieſt. 'To ſay that Chriſt is within man, is to 'worſhip Angels, and not to hold the Head Chriſt. This he makes the Prieſt to ſay; but whether any did ſo or no, it matters not to my purpoſe: But his anſwer. Anſw. Which none comes to witneſs Chriſt Fox great myſtery, p. 55.the Head, but who witneſs him in them, that the Angels muſt worſhip him that died and ſuffered at Jeruſalem; and they that worſhip him in them, worſhip not the Angels; and they that are not worſhipping him in them, are worſhipping Men, Devils, or Angels. By the Chriſt that died and ſuffered at Jeruſalem, they intend nothing leſs than the Son of Mary. I have already ſhewed, they utterly deny him to be the Chriſt, and they own Chriſt ſuffering at Jeruſalem in no other ſenſe than they ſay he died, ſuffered or was crucified in every one of themſelves: And that you may be convinced of the truth of what I here affirm, mark what follows.
They are falſe [Miniſters] who preach Chriſt Smith Prim. p. 9.Without, and bid people believe in him as he is in heaven above; but they are the true Miniſters that preach Chriſt Within.
C.
This is a great difference in their Doctrine, for the one to pretend to preach Chriſt Without, and another preacheth him Within.
Father.
Yes, it doth make a great difference, and hath no more fellowſhip together, than the Eaſt hath with the Weſt.
So that the Quakers Chriſt, the Light Within, is not only ſome part of the true Chriſt, who may (as Chriſt) be Without as well as Within them, but they are at ſuch odds one with another, that they can have no more fellowſhip than Eaſt and Weſt; and this is the Chriſt they worſhip, and to worſhip any other (as Fox ſaith) is to Worſhip Men, Devils, or Angels. Thus I have made good my ſecond Argument, and thereby proved them gr…ſs Idolaters.
And there is ſomewhat in their Idolatry that isS. 6. not common …dolatry, for it is Ap…tatical Idolatry, which is ſo earneſtly and with ſuch an Emphaſis exclaimed againſt by the Lord: Hath a Nation changed 2. Jer. 11. 12their Gods, which are yet no Gods; but my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit. Be aſtoniſhed O ye Heavens at this, be ye horribly afraid, be ye very deſolate, ſaith the Lord. And it is no leſs aggravated, in that (while the Heathen, who had not their means to know God, yet were groſs Idolaters; and as Pen ſaith true enough, worſhipped (as the Aegyptians) an Ape, a Crocodile, yea Herbs, almoſt any thing) theſe Wretches (for better they are not) worſhip that Natural Conſcience, that Spirit of Man, which is not only a Creature, an ignorant Creature, but full of darkneſs, errour, pride, all manner of ſin; and worſt of all, a Blaſphemer of the God of Heaven, and his Son Jeſus Chriſt the dear Redeemer.
But what now doth it boot them to ſay, they Worſhip § 7 and own the Creator, and Chriſt, and the Lord, and only him, and ſuch like? And what folly is it, after ſuch Evidences, for any to ſay, Sure they are not ſo had, their principles are of a more (tolerable at leaſt) ſtamp, they are civil, zealous people for Religion in their way? How! will nothing but drunkenneſs, or robbery of men in their outward goods, and ſuch like vices, render men wicked? will not the higheſt affronts to Heaven? muſt men be believed rather than God in his Word, which hath ſpoken of ſuch perſons to ariſe, 1 John 2 Chap. and many other places? See how God excuſed thoſe in the ſecond of Jer. in the 19. 23, and 24. Verſes.
Thine own wickedneſs ſhall correct thee, and thy back-ſlidings ſhall reprove thee: Know therefore and ſee, that it is an evil thing, and bitter, that thou haſt forſaken the LORD thy God, and that my fear is not in thee, ſaith the Lord God of Hoſts.
How canſt thou ſay, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? See thy way in the Valley, know what thou haſt done: thou art a ſwift Dromedary, traverſing her ways.
A wild Aſs uſed to the Wilderneſs, that ſnuffeth up the wind at her pleaſure; in her occaſion who can turn her away? All they that ſeek her will not weary themſelves, in her monethmonth they ſhall find her.