Animadversions Upon a Late Quibbling, Text
ANIMADVERSIONS Upon a late Quibling LIBEL From the Hartford Quakers, STILED, A Teſtimony for the Man Chriſt Jeſus. Demonſtrating, That it is not the ſame true and real Man Chriſt Jeſus that they give Teſtimony unto, but another falſe and feigned Jeſus: Or, A freſh and fuller draught of the ſame Antidote, againſt the Poyſon preſented in the Whores Golden cup.
By WILL. HAWORTH.
Rev. 2.2.
Thou haſt tryed them that ſay they are Apoſtles, and are not, and haſt found them lyars.
Mat. 7.15.
Beware of falſe Prophets that come unto you in ſheeps cloathing.
2 Cor. 11.13, 14.
For ſuch are falſe Apoſtles, deceitful workers, tranſforming themſelves into the Apoſtles of Chriſt: For no marvel, for Satan himſelf is transformed into an Angel of light.
Rom. 16.18.
And by good words and fair ſpeeches deceive the hearts of the ſimple.
Printed in the ſeventh Month. 1676.
Animadverſions Upon a late Quibling Libel, from the Hartford Quakers.
THere is a Book come to my hand, with this Title, viz. A Teſtimony for the Man Chriſt Jeſus, a Title never before (as I know) prefixed to any of the Quakers Books, by whom it appears this was written: By that time I had read it over, I found that to be true which I ſuſpected, viz. That the Wine did not anſwer the Buſh, the Matter the Title: They have only dealt herein, as the Enemy at Sea, which ſets up the Engliſh Flag thereby to deceive and take advantage. I looked for ſome particular name, but found none, who the proper Father of the Child ſhould be, who can tell? We are left to gueſs who the Father is, by the double tongue, Quibling Language, Critical Wit in catching his Adverſary in ſeeming contradictions and inconſiſtencies.
They ſay Pag. 3. In the beginning, my Pamphlet conſiſts of matter of charge aggravated with reviling, and Anſwers to Objections of my own framing, to render the Quakers infamous.
Anſw. If I cannot prove the charge true,x I confeſs I have wronged them, in ſaying that they are no Chriſtians, Seducers, but if it be true that they deny Jeſus of Nazareth (having heard it out of the mouth of a Prophet of their own with three witneſſes to the ſame, and have read it in their own Books, and you ſhall have further proof of it before we have finiſhed this: and indeed there is enough in this late Book that ſpeaks the ſame thing, as will appear anon) then I have ſaid too little of them, and need not fear the threatnings they produce, that Revilers ſhall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, as being no way guilty: If they will ſee their errour and Recant, I will take off my Charge, and my Reviling as they call it, otherwiſe it is but what the Apoſtle Paul's example againſt Seducers and falſe Teachers doth warrant me in. As to the Objections that they ſay are of my framing, I find all of them, ſave one in this their own Book, brought in againſt this Truth as ſtated by me concerning the Manhood of Chriſt in Heaven, which ſhall be notified to you in the progreſs, that one, which is not there produced by them, viz. Fleſh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; not any that ever reaſoned with the Quakers about this ſubject, or the reſurrection of the ſame body, but hath heard it from them, ſee then the ingenuity of theſe People in the entrance, ſaying, that I have framed Objections of my own to render the Quakers odious.
But the great and material thing which I haſten to, is, that I charge the Quakers with denying the ſame numerical, true, and real Manhood of Jeſus to be now in Heaven, a place remote from the Earth: I do I confeſs, thus charge them: now mark it diligently and bear it in your minds, as you read along, Pag. 3. l. 12. They utterly deny the matter charged: Let us examine what the matter is, contained in theſe words and phraſes, taken in their true Grammatical ſenſe and conſtruction, viz. The ſame numerical true and real Manhood of Jeſus Chriſt, in Heaven a place remote from the Earth.
1. That Jeſus Chriſt hath now a true and real Manhood conſiſting of two Eſſential diſtinct parts, a Humane Soul and Body.
2. That it is the ſame Numerical Manhood, not only the ſame in kind and nature, but the very ſelf ſame one in number that was born of the Virgin, crucified on the Croſs, laid in the Sepulcher, raiſed again.
3. That this ſelf ſame true Manhood is now in Heaven, a place remote from the Earth, ſo circumſcribed there, that it is not here upon Earth.
We heartily without any equivocation conſent to theſe three Heads, contained in thoſe words: The Hartford Quakers in their late Book ſeem to own the ſame, and would not be accounted guilty of the charge, but how ſhall they be tryed: no otherwiſe then by their confeſſion under their own hand in that Book.
1. That Jeſus Chriſt hath now a true and real Manhood; Theſe Hartford Quakers deny, while in words they own it.
1. That cannot be a true and real Manhood that hath not a true and real Humane ſoul, but according to the Hartford Quakers Jeſus Chriſt hath not a Humane ſoul: that ſoul that is in a thouſand diſtinct ſeveral places at one and the ſame time, cannot be a Humane ſoul, for ſo it is immenſe and infinite, but according to theſe Quakers the ſoul of Chriſt is in innumerable places at once: for that ſay it is in every Saint on Earth, Pag. 6.
2. That cannot be a true and real Manhood that is not the object of Senſe, that can no way be ſeen by the bodily eye: but theſe Hartford Quakers affirm, Pag. 10. 11. That the body of Chriſt now in Heaven is not the object of ſenſe, now what a body muſt that be, that cannot by any means be either ſeen, felt or heard.
3. That cannot be a true and real Manhood that can penetrate Wooden doors, and Stone walls. This is to make it ſo rare, thin, ſubtile and ſpirituous, that the very Eſſence and nature of a body is deſtroyed: Air and Light that are the moſt ſubtile of bodies, cannot pierce doors and walls, but muſt enter by ſome crannyes or pores; but the Quakers at Hartford do ſuppoſe that the body of Chriſt was ſo changed that it came into the Diſciples through the doors or walls, elſe why bring they that Scripture againſt me? John 10.19.
4. That cannot be a true and real Manhood that hath not a Humane ſhape, figure and from: but the Hartford Quakers deny this and diſpute againſt it, Pag. 11, 12.
2. The ſecond thing that is matter of the charge, viz. That they deny the ſelf ſame Numerical Manhood. Thus I prove it, If Chriſts Manhood (as they ſay in the late Book) cannot be ſeen with the bodily eye, though God do never ſo ſtrengthen it; if ſo immenſe, that part of it can be in every Saint, ſo ſubtile and ſpirituous that it can penetrate doors and Stone walls of an houſe, it cannot be the ſame for kind and nature with that which he had before his Reſurrection, for it appears evidently that was not ſuch a Manhood, why, then if it be not the ſame in kind and Nature, it cannot be the ſame in Number.
3. The third thing as to the matter of Charge, viz. That this ſame Manhood is now in Heaven, a place remote, ſo circumſcribed there, that it is not here on Earth, this they openly deny in ſo many words, Pag. 6. But his concluſion (i. e.) is denyed, (by the connexion it appears,) that therefore Jeſus Chriſt is not here on Earth as he is Man, but as to his Manhood only in Heaven, a place remote from us, and in many other places of the Book you ſhall find the like: They do clearly affirm that Jeſus Chriſt is preſent on Earth in and with his Saints as to his ſoul.
The Papiſts ſay in their monſtrous opinion of Tranſubſtantiation, that the natural Humane body of Chriſt, can be, and is in an hundred, nay, a thouſand ſeveral places at once: So theſe that the ſoul of Jeſus is in innumerable places at once.
Thus every whit of the matter of Charge ſtands good againſt them, and I have brought them in as witneſſes againſt themſelves, whilſt they did pretend to the weak people to vindicate themſelves:
Now do not they that deny theſe three things mentioned, plainly deny Jeſus Nazareth to be the Meſſiah? which they ſay, Pag. 4. is the other part of the Charge: if Jeſus Chriſt hath not the ſelf ſame, true and real Manhood, which he took of the Virgin, and which dwelt here on Earth at that place called Nazareth, then is not Jeſus of Nazareth the Meſſiah according to the Quakers: For his name was called Jeſus, as he was born of the Virgin, Mat. 1.21. And ſhe ſhall bring forth as Son, and thou ſhalt call his Name Jeſus, and that adjunct of Nazareth is given becauſe of his habitation in thoſe parts, Mat. 2.23. And he came and dwelt in a City called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was ſpoken by the Prophets, He ſhall be called a Nazarene. But theſe people, now it's plain (the mask being pull'd off) deny that Manhood that was taken of the Virgin, and dwelt at Nazareth, in that they do ſuppoſe it ſo changed, that it's turned into an Immenſe infinite Being, a Deity which that Manhood was not: Let them but remember that Scripture, John 8.24. Except you believe that I am he, ye ſhall die in your ſins: and if they write again, fairly take off theſe things that I have briefly brought againſt them.
Let us now hear throughout the Book what they have to ſay for themſelves: that they are not guilty of denying the Manhood of Jeſus Chriſt in Heaven.
The firſt thing produced is W. Pens confeſſion at Barbakin, Pag. 4. W. P. ſpeaks in the name of the Quakers thus, we do believe the Man Chriſt Jeſus to be glorified in Heaven, we do believe the holy Manhood to be in Heavenly Glory, they add, ſee how far the Quakers are from denying the true and real Manhood of Chriſt in Heaven. Some that are not acquainted with their way of ſpeaking, may think this ſufficient, but others that have been uſed to them cannot, till W. Pen doth deſcribe what he means by the Man Chriſt Jeſus, and what by the Manhood, whether it is ſuch a Manhood as hath a Humane ſoul and body as its eſſential parts: For G. Fox in his great Myſtery, Pag. 286. hath theſe words, the Man may ſpeak, Chriſt in the Male and in the Female. W. P. then in the name of all the Quakers, may mean ſuch a man is Jeſus Chriſt, as is in every Male and Female Preacher, that is nothing but the light within: Fox again, hath another paſſage, Pag. 71. Chriſt's nature is not bumane which is earthly; for that is the firſt Adam's. This man Chriſt that W. P. confeſſeth, in the name of all the Quakers, may be ſuch as hath no Humane nature, ſuch a man as never had a nature that was of an Earthly ſubſtance, ſuch a man as came not of Adam's race and line: but we always thought and believed that the Manhood was ſuch, which is Chriſts nature as properly as his Divine nature. Again, nothing more obvious in our diſcourſes with them, than that Heaven is within them, I have heard it in diſcourſe with them. What doth all this brave ſound of words in this Confeſſion at Barbican come to? why, this is the ſum of it, (when he ſaith, we believe the Man Chriſt to be glorified in Heaven, and the holy Manhood to be in heavenly glory:) viz. that the Light within being hearkened to, and obeyed, is lifted up and exalted, and glorified in the heart of man, I know it to be true, that Pen hath written it in the Folio, put forth by him and Whitehead, viz. that the Light in that body that was taken of the Virgin, is the Chriſt: whereas we know and aſſert that it's neither the Divine nature alone, nor Humane alone, but both in union, that is the Chriſt of God: I will give one teſtimony out of Smith's Primer, Pag. 8. They that are falſe Teachers preach Chriſt without, and bid the people believe in him, as he is in Heaven above: Now leſt ſome Reconciler as W. P. or any other ſhould ſay that their Brother Smith meant, that whoever preached Chriſt without only, were falſe Teachers, not but that the preaching of Chriſt without, will conſiſt with the preaching of Chriſt within: hear his own words again, Pag. 9. Child, This is a great difference in their Doctrine (ſpeaking ſtill of the true and falſe Teachers) for one to preach Chriſt without, and another preacheth him within. Fat. Yes it doth make a great difference, and bath no more fellowſhip together then the Eaſt with the Weſt: See how far they are from denying the true and real Manhood of Jeſus Chriſt in Heaven: he that will be decieved let him be deceived, by this line you may meaſure all the reſt that followeth.
The next thing to take off the Charge, is their own confeſſion in the Book, Pag. 5. They write, We farther add and confeſs, that the ſame man, Chriſt that ſuffered, and was put to death in the fleſh, and was raiſed from the dead by the mighty Power of God, aſcended into Heaven, Gods dwelling place, aſcended both as to change of place, and ſtate of glory: Is not here a very full and plain confeſſion? Would not you take the Hareford Quakers more Orthodox than others of them? would not one hope that our writing againſt their Errour, doth inlighten them, teach them, convince them, and that they are coming near to ſome good ſettlement in the good old Truths, and that they will at length become Chriſtians: but it is ſo with ſome that have accuſtomed themſelves to ly and cheat, they are always ſuſpected by them that know them, ſo truly is it with this People, they have altogether loſt their credit and reputation with many, as in this matter, in that we have ſo frequently caught them jugling, equivocating, quibling, cogging the Dice, that we can no more truſt them: they have ſaid much here, more then ever I read in any of their books, we would be glad if they were real, but behold, with the very ſame breath they unſay it again, Pag. 15. This exaltation was not that he might remain in a place remote, (mark that) and ſeparate from his body, which he is the head of, giving this reaſon for it, For this were to keep body and head aſunder, adding, that the Son of Man had power to deſcend at his pleaſure, to come again, bringing Matth. 28. I will be with you always to the end of the World: Note, here is one of the Objections as they ſay of my own framing, the reſt will follow.
They had (pray remember) in the beginning utterly denyed the matter charged, here they are willing to own a good part of it, viz. That Chriſt is not in Heaven, a place remote, They confeſſed juſt now that the ſame man: Jeſus Chriſt that died, was raiſed and aſcended: But let us enquire, whither did he aſcend? They anſwer, into Heaven: But may be mean a ſtate of glory, no, a place of glory, ſay they; but obſerve the next queſtion in order, Where is this Heaven? Is it above or beneath? Is it remote and and far off, or is it near? their anſwer is, It muſt not be remote, it muſt then be near at hand, it muſt be where the Myſtical body is, and part of it I am ſure is on Earth, for the head and body muſt not be aſunder, why then, when they ſay the ſame man aſcended into Heaven, they mean nothing but that Globe which we call the Earth: that Heaven they call Gods dwelling place, but they mean the hearts of Men; he changed not his ſtate only, but place at his aſcenſion; but that change of place was ſuch, you muſt know, that notwithſtanding he was here on Earth as to his Manhood, for his ſoul was in the Saints: we may deſpair at this rate, ever by words to underſtand one another. Here is Babel (indeed) Language confounded: But he had all power in Heaven and Earth given him, and therefore might deſcend at his pleaſure, and he promiſed to be with his Diſciples alway to the end: To argue from Chriſts power to his will, was never accounted ſtrong or right reaſoning. The Papiſts argued thus againſt the Martyrs for their Tranſubſtantiation, viz. God had power, and was able to turn the Bread into his Natural body, ergo, when as the Word, his revealed Will, declared it otherwiſe, and called it Bread after it was bleſſed: would it be a good argument? Chriſt hath all power in Heaven and Earth given him, therefore he may be crucified over again, when as the will of God is revealed in the Scripture,Heb. 9.26. that he is but once to be offered in the end of the World; ſo in this caſe, Chriſt though he hath all power, can do nothing contrary to his own Will revealed: Now it's plainly revealed, that Chriſt as to his Manhood, is not to deſcend frequently upon Earth, but is to abide in Heaven an appointed time, which is not yet finiſhed, Acts 3.21. Whom the Heavens muſt receive, till the times of reſtitution of all things: If they would mind this one Scripture, it would put an end to all their cavils, and guide them in this controverſy. What was received into Heaven? His Manhood only; as for his Deity, it is Infinite, and can in no wiſe be ſaid that the Heaven received it. Now, how long is the Heaven to receive this Manhood? Till the times of the reſtitution of all things, which times let them dare to ſay are already come; he hath not then as yet deſcended here on Earth as to his Manhood: Notwithſtanding, he hath fulfilled his promiſe, and hath alway been preſent with his Diſciples in the diſcharge of their Miniſterial gifts, and will be to the end of the World, by his Spirit.
The reaſon of this which they produce, why the Manhood muſt not be in a place remote? Becauſe, that Head and Body would then be aſunder. Anſw. It's not poſſible for Chriſt and the Church his Body, to have ſome union without a corporal touch? The Sun is in the Firmament at a great diſtance, yet we have ſome kind of union with it; a man may be many miles diſtant from his wife, yet he hath ſome kind of union with her; we took this union to be Myſtical, and Spiritual, not corporal and carnal; as there is one ſoul throughout the natural body of Man, the ſame in the head, and in every member; ſo one Spirit in Jeſus Chriſt the Myſtical Head, and in every one of his Members the Saints, whereby they are united to him. 1 Cor. 6.17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one ſpirit: Let it be judged now, whether the Quakers are not thoſe that know Chriſt after the fleſh, when they ſpeak of the Manhood being locally preſent with, and in the Saints, otherwiſe there can be no union they think?
But Chriſt being preſent in Spirit, which I grant, muſt needs (ſay they, Pag. 6.) be an overturning of what I have aſſorted, and a contradicting my ſelf, and therefore they call upon me to reconcile it how I can: But why ſo, becauſe that the Spirit of Chriſt is an Eſſential part of the Manhood, the ſame with his Soul: Now if Chriſt be preſent by his Spirit in his Saints, then muſt he be in ſome part of his Manhood o… Earth. I have read, there were ſome formerly that held the Holy Ghoſt did inform the Humane bod of Jeſus Chriſt inſtead of the Soul; but this opinion of the Hartford Quakers is much worſe, for they grant, that the Soul or Spirit ſpoken of, is an Eſſential part of the Man Chriſt, in the very ſame ſenſe with me, and yet ſaith it is in every Saint, inveſting it with the Office of the Holy Ghoſt: Let us try this notion, if the Soul of Chriſt's Manhood be preſent on Earth with and in his Saints, then it muſt be one of theſe two ways: Either with, or without the Humane body, united to it, or ſeparated from it: if in, and with the body united, then the Humane body which was taken of the Virgin, is likewiſe with, and in every Saint on Earth, and ſo is become an Infinite and Immenſe Spirit, and is ceaſed from being a Humane body; this is ſo monſtrous we dare not believe it: Or, 2. It is ſeparated from the Humane body in its preſence with the Saints, then is not Jeſus Chriſt a man in Heaven (as they have confeſſed,) it is but a dead body in Heaven: This we cannot receive, He was dead once, but is alive now, and he is to be alive for evermore, Rev. 1.18. If they ſay that needs not, (viz.) that the Soul ſhould be ſeparated from the Humane Natural body, it may be, and is in it ſtill in Heaven, and extended from it to every Saint upon Earth: Then muſt the Soul of Chriſt be Immenſe and Infinite, and this is too much for us to ſwallow; for then there muſt be a new created God in time, becauſe every Infinite and Immenſe is God: Now the Soul of Chriſt's Manhood was created in time: who can make that which is crooked ſtraight? Error is crookedneſs, abſurdity, and rottenneſs when it comes to the tryal. In the cloſe of this I would ask them, whether in theſe two Scriptures, viz. Iſa. 61.1. The Spirit of the Lord God its upon me, the Lord hath anointed me, and Joh. 3.34. For God giveth not the Spirit by meaſure unto him. By the Spirit is to be underſtood the Soul of Chriſt, the Eſſential part, if not, (as I believe,) then have I an eaſie way of reconciling my ſelf in this matter, telling them that when I grant that Chriſt is preſent with, and in his Saints on Earth by his Spirit, that I mean the Holy Ghoſt, who is God and Infinite, and can be and is in all the Saints, both that are in Heaven and on Earth at once: not the Spirit of the Manhood, an Eſſential part, that is a finite Creature, therefore their notion is ridiculous: They cannot paſs over the report I made of Will. Bates a Neighbour; what he ſhould ſay, viz. that what was taken of the Virgin had now no being: They queſtion, whether I truly ſtate the matter, and cenſure me ſharply to be of a creeping, peeviſh, inſinuating ſpirit, to ſeek an occaſion againſt my Neighbour, and to notify him in Print, Pag. 7.
Anſw. It was ſo exceeding groſs and blunt a ſpeech, that having an occaſion to write upon this Subject of the Manhood of Chriſt, I could do no leſs then Print it, and ſurely inſtead of condemning me, they ſhould have cenſured their Brother Bates, for ſpeaking ſo raſhly and plainly, as that there is not a ſtarting hole, no bit of any equivocation; no room left to leap back, which is not the Quakers way of expreſſing themſelves: Now that it may appear that I had a right call, when I went to diſcourſe with Will. Bates, and therefore am wrongfully cenſured by theſe men, to be of a creeping ſpirit, ſeeking occaſion againſt my Neighbour, &c. and that I have ſtated the matter right, read the following Certificate.
Be it known to all whom it may concern, that we whoſe names are ſubſcribed, do teſtify, that it was through our motion, and deſire, that William Haworth was preſent at the diſcourſe we had with William Bates, and that we did more then once hear him plainly ſay, that what Chriſt took of the Virgin had now no being.
Sept. 19. 1676.
Daniel Doughty, John Albury, Stephen Tothil.
We evidently ſee now, they are not all guided by one and the ſame Infallible Light, elſe that Light is not one with it ſelf, in that it directs them to contrary Opinions. Will. Bates ſaith, that which was taken of the Virgin had now no being, Theſe Hartfordians, Pag. 7. That the Man Chriſt did neither periſh, nor vaniſh in any thing Eſſential to him, as to his Spirit or Body: Who can bring the two Poles of North and South together, let them as can reconcile theſe two ſayings: But withal, let me ask them whether Viſibility, Materiality, Finiteneſs, and having the ſame ſhape, be not Eſſential to the Man Chriſt? there is none in their wits can deny it: but theſe men, as hath in ſome meaſure already appeared, and will farther appear in the progreſs, have taken away the Viſibility, Materiality, Finiteneſs, and having the ſame Humane Figure from the body of the Man Chriſt, they have then herein manifeſted themſelves no leſs than groſs Lyers, and Cheaters, (for there hath ſomething Eſſential periſhed as to his Soul and Body, according to their Doctrine,) withall let them remember, that I had more proof for my Charge againſt them, then meerly my opinion (as they of the Barbican Diſpute, Pag. 4. when as I have ſuch a plain loud witneſs as this, viz. that which was taken of the Virgin had now no being.
But here is ſtill more againſt our Opinion, viz. Chriſt is now a man in Heaven; if ſo, how then can we diſintangle our ſelves from that thing charged upon us, in the 8th Page, that in this we reſemble the carnal Opinion of the Anthropomorphites, who hold, that God is like unto Man, in ſhape and form, and that he hath a right and and left hand as Men have, which likewiſe Mugleton holds.
What would theſe men be at, when ſhall we find them conſtant, my ſoul pitieth their inſtability, how are they toſſed to and fro, did they not all along ſay in words, that Jeſus Chriſt was a Man in Heaven, had the Eſſentials of a Man ſoul and body: Now, if he hath a Humane body, it muſt neceſſarily have a Humane ſhape: why then, they Symbolize with that Brute Mugleton as much as Wee, and if they be concerned, let them anſwer for themſelves; only you ſee by their way of reaſoning, they believe not a word of what they ſay, viz. That Chriſt is a Man in Heaven, but equivocates in all; otherwiſe, why would they produce this? We can anſwer for our ſelves, we are not guilty of having any ſuch groſs carnal conceptions of the Deity, as to think or ſay that the Humane ſhape is the ſhape of the Deity; we abhor ſuch idolatrous thoughts, we know what the Scripture ſaith, and believe it, Iſai. 40.25. To whom then will you liken God, or what likeneſs will you compare him to: Deut. 4.12. Ye ſaw no ſimilitude but only heard a voice; but we ſay, the Word was made Fleſh, Joh. 1.14. and in that Fleſh aſcended into Heaven, hath that ſame Body and Soul there, and it is ſtill in union with the Deity, the fulneſs of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in him, Col. 2.9. but the form and figure the Body hath there, is not the form and figure of the Deity, but of the Manhood: the Godhead is Infinite and Immenſe. And when we ſpeak of Gods right hand and Chriſts ſitting there, we mean a ſtate and place of Honour, Power and Glory, that Chriſt upon his Aſcenſion was exalted to.
Still they diſpute againſt that they ſeem to own, viz That Chriſt is now a Man in Heaven: If his being aſcended into Heaven, hinders him from being on Earth, why not his aſcending far above all Heavens, from being in Heaven? Pag. 9. Here is a ſecond of the Objections, as they ſay, of my own framing.
Anſw. In my laſt little Book I opened this Phraſe, viz. Far above all Heavens. Any of the three Senſes I gave, is ſafe and good. Firſt, Far above all Heavens, is no more then that in Pſal. 68.18. from whence this is taken, nay the very ſame with it, Thou haſt aſcended on high. 2. By the Heavens may be underſtood, the viſible Heavens that may be ſeen with the bodily eye, becauſe of their nearneſs to us. 3. Or Heavenly Powers, Angelical Nature and Perfection. Now let us draw up their Argument, Jeſus Chriſt aſcended on high, above the lower Heavens that may be ſeen, and is more excellent and higher then any Angel: Ergo, he is not in Heaven, that cannot be ſeen with the bodily eye, becauſe of its diſtance from us. Are you not convinced mightily with ſuch ſtrong Argumentations? In Eph. 1.20, 21. He is ſaid to be ſet far above every name that is named, not only in this World, but that which is to come; Ergo, Chriſt is above the Father, this is the ſame way of Reaſoning.
That Chriſt as to his Manhood hath been upon Earth, and is upon Earth at leaſt as to his Soul, ſince his Aſcenſion they attempt to prove here, Pag. 9. from the Scriptures that ſpeaks of his coming to his Diſciples ſince that time. John 14.2. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you. verſ 18. I will not leave you comfortleſs, I will come unto you.
Anſw. The firſt place ſpeaks of his coming at the day of Judgment, when he will inſtate his Saints in their full Glory and Happineſs, in body as well as ſoul; this is the ſecónd Perſonal appearance of Jeſus Chriſt, which is not yet, but will be at the times of the reſtitution of all things, (as the Scripture ſpeaks:) The other Scripture ſpeaks of his coming in the power of the Spirit to their hearts, to comfort them in the evil days wherein they ſhould be caſt; then they are nothing at all to their purpoſe, to prove Chriſt perſonal Deſcenſion upon Earth, either as to his Soul or Body ſince his Aſcenſion into Heaven.
Another Objection is drawn from John 3.13. No man hath aſcended up to Heaven,Pag. ibid. but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man which is in Heaven. Here is a third of the Objections which they ſay, is of my own framing, and it's brought here againſt Chriſt being now in Heaven as to his Manhood: I have in my laſt anſwered it fully to which you may have recourſe, as to what they beg here, I can grant them the whole, without any loſs to my cauſe, or gain to theirs: Chriſt was ſpiritually in Heaven with his Saints when on Earth, and is ſpiritually on Earth with them now he is in Heaven▪ The Reader knoweth what we mean by the ſpiritual preſence of Chriſt with his Saints.
They ſay,Pag. ibid that of his coming the Apoſtles had ſigns and evidences, who by him wrought Miracles, Acts 4.10. (i. e.) the Miracles that the Apoſtles wrought, were ſigns of his Perſonal coming, that he hath been upon Earth ſince his Aſcenſion, as to his Manhood.
Anſw. There were Miracles wrought by Moſes, and Eliah, and Eliſha, and what they did, they did by the power of Chriſt, who is God bleſſed for ever: Therefore Chriſt Jeſus did Perſonally appear upon Earth, and came again from Heaven in his Manhood, before ever he had a Manhood, or ever did aſcend into Heaven, riſum teneatis Amici? Miracles wrought by the Apoſtles were only Signs of the coming of Chriſt, in Power and Spirit.
Here now comes their exceptions againſt four of the Properties of the Manhood of Chriſt, as they ſtated by me, what pity is it that they ſhould take ſo much pains to oppoſe themſelves in their own confeſſion.
The Manhood of Chriſt ſince the Aſcenſion, is the Object of Senſe, is hath been ſeen with the bodily eye, and may be ſeen, Stephen ſaw him, thus in my laſt.
To this they Object, Pag. 10. but before I name their Arguments, I here cry out of open and manifeſt wrong: in that they Quakers have twice or thrice endeavoured to make the Reader believe, that I aſſerted, there was no more in Stephen's ſeeing the glory of God, and the Son of Man in Heaven, than what was natural, that he had no extraordinary aſſiſtance and ſtrengh from God in it, Pag. 11. but to place all this ſight upon carnal and bodily eyes, theſe are their words, whereas, they had writ my own words before, viz. Stephens ſight was ſtrengthened after a wonderful miraculous way, ſo that he pierced to the Heavenly glory with his eye, this was more than what was natural no doubt; mark that, whether this be not wilful forging, judge ye.
But to their Arguments againſt Stephen's ſeeing Chriſt in Heaven with his bodily eye it being ſtrenghthened by the Lord.
1. According to my own confeſſion, Chriſt was paſſed into the inviſible Heavens, Ergo, he could not be ſeen, Pag. 10.
Anſw. Their Argument is only a Childiſh quible about the word inviſible, if I had but in the ſtead of it, ſaid unſeen, there would not have been any ground for this cavil; but I did indeed think I ſhould be taken in that ſenſe, and I believe was by all but the Quakers: Should I ſay, many of the Stars are inviſible, will any underſtand me that they are not capable of being ſeen by any Teliſcope or Proſpective glaſſes, or, that they are not ordinarily ſeen, becauſe of their great diſtance, and the weakneſs of our ſight; Children will play with Rattles.
Arg. 2. Pag. 11. The ground of Stephen's ſeeing the Heavens opened, and Jeſus on the right band of God, was on his being full of the Holy Ghoſt.
Anſw. If meerly being full of the Holy Ghoſt be the ground, Then Moſes and all the Prophets-ſaw the Son of Man, ſtanding at the right band of God, before he was the Son of Man, or ever did aſcend thither, for they were all filled by the Holy Ghoſt: And then Barnabas and all the Diſciples in the ſecond Chapter of the Acts, ſaw the Son of Man in Heaven; and then this that is related of Stephen in this Hiſtory, that we took to be a ſingular remarkable thing, is but what is common to all Saints filled with the Spirit: beſides, how can this meerly as ſuch, be the ground of Stephens ſight of Chriſt in Heaven, when the wicked ſhall ſee Chriſt coming in power and great glory, Rev. 1.7. Every eye ſhall ſee him, it cannot be meant of a ſpiritual ſight, for every one hath not a ſpiritual eye. For (ought I can learn) theſe men underſtand nothing more, nothing beſides ſome ſpiritual ſight that Stephen had of Jeſus Chriſt on Earth in his own heart, elſe, why do they mention the viſion that John had as a parallel inſtance.
Pag. ibid. John ſaw the golden Candleſticks, and in the midſt thereof one like-the-Son of Man: Now, thoſe Churches that were repreſented by the ſeven Candleſticks, were then upon Earth, ſtay, and hear the concluſion: Ergo, when Stephen looked up ſtedfaſtly into Heaven, and ſaw the glory of God, and the Son of Man at the right hand of God, the Heavens being opened: All this was no more then ſeeing Chriſt on Earth, the light in his own Heart and Conſcience. O for a little plain heartedneſs and honeſty: The inſtance is not parallel, John's we ſay and believe, were only Spiritual Revelations in extaſies and trances, Stephen's was an Ocular Viſion: Let me add this to theſe poor unbelieving Creatures, why ſhould it ſeem a thing impoſſible to you, that God ſhould ſo ſtrengthen with his Divine power the bodily eye of a Saint, to ſee into the higheſt Heaven, removing all things out of the way, which is denoted by that Phraſe, [The Heavens opened.]
The laſt thing in this matter, Pag. 11. This renders the glory of God, and his righthand alſo obvions and viſible to carnal eyes, you may ſee (ſay they) what mean and carnal thoughts this man hath of God, and the glory of God.
Anſw. I would not be guilty of any carnal thoughts of God, or his glory, but yet I dare not but believe the Scriptures of Truth, and what they have declared in theſe matters, although I ſhould not ſatisfy my Reaſon in all particulars, yet it is my duty to ſubmit to the foreign thus ſaith the Lord. I do believe the Deity it ſelf cannot be ſeen, no Mortal eye can approach that inviſibility, yet I believe that Peter and John did ſee Chriſt in his Transfiguration, they ſaw his face ſhine as the Sun, and his raiment as white as Snow, Mat. 17.2. They ſaw it I believe with their bodily eye, and I query whether that was not ſomething of the glory of God, whether there was not a Material created light and ſplendor, that God made uſe of, to ſet forth the Majeſty and Glory of his Son to theſe his Diſciples external Senſes.
Exceptions and Objections againſt the other Property of Chriſt Manhood.
I ſay it hath the ſame Form and Figure that it had when here upon Earth, yet withall, ſay it is a very glorious Body: How gloriouſly is it repreſented and painted out to us by Daniel and John? more bright then a thouſand Suns.
1. They cavil at this, and ſay, how then hath it the ſame Form and Figure that it had when here upon Earth, was it thus bright and glorious more then a thouſand Suns, when here on Earth ſubject to ſufferings, Pag. 12.
Anſw. I willingly grant that the Manhood hath much more glory upon it, then it had in its ſuffering ſtate; but its being inveſted with more glory, did neither change nor annihilate the Form; he had the ſame Humane ſhape, no doubt, when transfigured, as when he was crucified, and the ſame Humane countenance: a man may be now in vile raiment, and anon in gorgeous Attire, yet remain the ſame Man, and have the ſame Form and Figure and diſtinguiſhing Character in his face: the Sun might have a thouſand times more light, luſtre and glory in it, yet retain the ſame dimenſions and rotundity.
2. This is to intrude, they ſay, into unſeen things, Pag. ibid. Anſw. While I keep within the bounds of Scripture, and right Reaſon grounded upon it, I do not intrude, and whether I have not done ſo, I leave it to the judgement of Chriſtians. What would theſe men have, the Manhood muſt either have the ſame Form and Figure that it had here upon Earth, or, it muſt have the Form and Figure of ſome other Creature, (i. e.) either of an Angel, or of — which I will not write, or there muſt be a tranſmutation of it into the Deity, which way ſoever they take, they deſtroy the Manhood of Jeſus Chriſt, which is a deſtroying the whole Chriſtian Religion at one blow.
3. Exception, Pag. 12. They ſay, that I talk like one ignorant of the Scriptures, in aſſerting, that the Manhood hath the ſame Form and Figure that it had when on Earth, in that he was known to his Diſciples after his Reſurrection: and ſaith, that he appeared in divers Forms after his Reſurrection, Mark 16.12. After that, he appeared to two of them in another Form. Anſw. All the Books of the Evangeliſts do but compleat the Hiſtory, one of them is to give Light to the other, and in any difficulty one to open and explain the other, ſome of them being more full than the other: This is Mark is the ſhorteſt of all, now look into the ſame particular portion of Hiſtory, as it was written by Luke, Luk. 24.15. And it came to paſs, that while they communed together, and reaſoned, Jeſus himſelf drew near, and went with them; but their eyes were held, that they ſhould not know him: it was then he himſelf, and like himſelf, with the ſame Form and Figure Humane, otherwiſe, he ceaſed to be a man; but it pleaſed the Lord, who had abſolute command over their ſenſes, ſo by his power to hold their ſight, that they ſhould not preſently diſcern who he was, but ſeemed to them as one in another habit, ſo the word foreign doth ſometimes ſignify.
4. Except: But if in the ſame Form, how came it to paſs that Mary did not know him, but thought it had been the Gardiner, John 20.14, 15. Anſw.
1. This Scripture makes directly againſt them, it appears that Jeſus had a Humane ſhape and form after his Reſurrection, which is a glorified State; for ſuch is the form and ſhape of a Gardiner:
2. But that Mary did not know him, but ſuppoſed it had been the Gardiner, no wonder, when as ſhe knew not that he was riſen, ſhe came not to look for a living man, but only for the dead body, Verſ. 15. if thou haſt born him hence, tell me where thou haſt laid him.
3. I ſay here eyes were held that ſhe ſhould not know him, as in the Scripture of Luke before.
5 Twice he appeared in the midſt of his Diſciples the doors being ſhut, John 20.19, 26. was there no change then, Pag. ibid. Anſw. Yes, of State and Condition, not of form and Humane figure. The Papiſts make uſe of this Scripture for their Tranſubſtantiation, they ſay, his body penetrated the doors, the ſame apprehenſions muſt theſe Quakers have, or elſe in vain do they quote this Scripture; but its no where ſaid, that he went through the doors: The prepoſition foreign is not in the Text, only foreign the doors were ſhut when he appeared in the midſt of them, none of them, nor any other man opened the doors for him; there was then no queſtion, a Miracle wrought by him, but not by penetrating the doors, how then came he in? why, how came Peter out of Priſon? did he come through the Iron gate? Acts 12.10. They came to the Iron gate that leadeth unto the City, which opened to them of its own accord, could not Chriſt effect the like, think you, for himſelf?
Pag. 12, 13. The Oppoſers give a laſh at two other Properties in a very ſcornful way: As for his uncouth and unſcriptural talk, that the Saints ought to worſhip the Humane Nature of Chriſt, and this Humane Nature is ſuch as giveth life unto our Souls, we need take little notice of ſuch Language. Anſw. My Language as to the firſt, is not unſcriptural, for there I ſay, he received worſhip from ſeveral, when he was here on the Earth in the Fleſh: and this is ſo notoriouſly known, that I need not to inſtance. But here I will give you ſome Scripture, Mat. 2.11. The wiſe men, its ſaid, fell down and worſhipped him, when a Babe. Matth. 8.2. The Leper worſhipped him: Matth. 9.18. There the Ruler worſhipped him. Matth. 14.33. They that were in the Ship upon his ſtilling the Storm, worſhipped him. Matth. 15.25. The Women of Canaan, worſhipped him. John 9.38. The blind man that Chriſt healed, worſhipped him. After his Reſurrection, Mat. 28.9. They held him by the feet and worſhipped him, and the 17. verſ. And ſince his Aſcenſion John worſhipped him in the Viſions he had; and Rev. 5. The twenty four Elders, yea, and every Creature in its kind and way, is ſaid to worſhip the Lamb: See what ingenous men theſe be, to ſay my talk is unſcriptural, in pleading for the Humane Nature of Chriſt to be worſhipped in conjunction with the Deity, the foundation of the worſhip being the Deity; neither is my talk uncouth, but only to them that underſtand not the Chriſtian Religion, it is uſed by all the Chriſtian Churches, and by all Chriſtian Writers that have written any thing of the Humane Nature of Chriſt, eſpecially if they have any contention with Socinians. The ſame can I ſay of the other Property, viz. That the Fleſh of Chriſt giveth life to our Souls, I have explained my ſelf in that diſcourſe, in what way and manner it giveth life: let them if they dare, oppoſe it, how unſcriptural is this, when as I there annexed, John 6.53. Except ye eat my Fleſh and drink my Blood, ye have no life in you? whenever Chriſt mentioneth his Fleſh and Blood as here, our judgement and belief is, that he hath always reſpect to his Manhood, and the benefits the Church hath by his Incarnation, let them dare to contradict it, and we ſay, that this Fleſh that gives life, is himſelf, the Manhood with the Deity is but one Perſon, one Chriſt, one Mediator, and both are ſpoken in that place which they in their corrupt judgments alledge againſt us, John 6.5. Pag. 13. robbing the Humanity of that which is due to it.
Now let us gather up all briefly without wronging them a title, and you ſhall ſee what a ſtrange Manhood it is that they have confeſſed to?
1. Its (according to them) a Manhood that is no way the object of Senſe, cannot any way be ſeen, felt, or heard, though it was both ſeen, felt, and heard, after the Reſurrection which was a glorified ſtate.
2. It is an Infinite, Immenſe God, not any where to be circumſcribed, it may be in a thouſand times ten thouſand of Saints at once.
3. It is ſo thin, ſubtle, that it can penetrate doors, Stone walls.
4. It is informe, hath no ſhape, Figure, Lineaments, Countenance that is Humane.
5. No one is to give any worſhip to it, though in union with the Godhead:
6. It is ſuch a Manhood as did not die for Sinners, nor doth not now intercede for Sinners: For thus I argue, according to what hath paſt, if the Fleſh of Chriſt hath not procured life for our Souls, (which they call'd unſcriptural, uncouth, not to be taken notice of,) then did Chriſt never die for Sinners: life for our Souls could no way be procured, but by expiating and taking away the cauſe of death, which was ſin: Now ſin is no way expiated but by the death of Jeſus Chriſt, but Jeſus Chriſt only died as Man ſuffered as to his Fleſh; had there been no Manhood there had been no Offering, no Sacrifice, 2. According to them the Man Chriſt doth not now intercede, if he procured not Life by his Fleſh and Manhood, he doth not intercede, there can be no life to our Souls, without the Spirit and Faith: now there is neither Spirit nor Faith to any, but by the Interceſſion of Chriſt, he obtains them thereby for us, but now there is no Interceſſion without the Fleſh and Manhood of Chriſt: the blood of the Sacrifice was carried into the holieſt, which figured this, viz. Chriſt carries the Merit of his ſufferings into Heaven: 1 John 2.2. He is an Advocate by vertue of his being a Propitiation: it is the Man Chriſt Jeſus that is the Mediator:
7. Such a man is Chriſt as is not now a Prieſt. Heb. 8.4. If he were on earth, 1 Tim. 2.5.he ſhould not be a Prieſt: but he is on Earth (the Quakers ſay at leaſt in one Eſſential part of his Manhood, his Soul is in every S…int: you ſee Error is big bellied and fruitful. This is the effect of forſaking the Scripture, ſetting up another Rule, not content with ſound Doctrine, given forth in ſound words, condemning the Chriſtians in this day as having groſs and carnal conceptions of things, refining Religion, and the bleſſed holy glorious, true, real, operative Manhood of Jeſus Chriſt into Air, Wind, Fancy, Nothing; and all this under a pretence, that they are fully for it: but we have tried them, and you now plainly perceive, what their true Scriptural ſenſe is, which they ſpeak of, Pag. 13.
We have done with that controverſy concerning the Manhood of Chriſt, now they undertake to vindicate Chriſtopher Tayler, whom we anſwered in a Poſtſcript, whom (if he be living) I thought was at years off — to anſwer for himſelf:
And now (ſay they) to manifeſt how like a confuſed and diſtempered crazed man W. H. writes, take a ſhort view of ſome of his inconſiſtencies, &c. Pag. 13.
Reply. Chriſt, my Lord, was accounted mad, by his own kindred, and by others, the Scribes and Phariſees; the Apoſtle Paul by Agrippa, and the falſe Teachers was thus ſtigmatized to be beſides himſelf: it was a common thing among the Papiſts thus to cenſure the Martyrs; becauſe Philpot in the Convocation houſe manifeſted but a little more then ordinary zeal againſt the Popiſh errors, they gave it out that he was raging Bedlam mad: this is an old trick of the Devil, I could name you one of my Brethren that is full of zeal for Chriſt, that they have not long ſince thus dealt with all, muſt I think much then if in this I be conformed to Chriſt, to his Apoſtles, to the Martyrs, and the worthieſt of my Brethren? no ſurely, it is my honour, and we have reaſon to pity this People, that herein as in other things they make themſelves ſo like the Antichriſtian Papiſts: I could tell them of that common ſpeech, that ſome there be that are not in danger of madneſs, and ſay again that it might diſcompoſe the moſt compoſed man ſtill to converſe with men in Bedlam. They are at it again, Pag. 16. Leſt he fall into manifeſt diſtraction, as may tend to his and your reproach, for he appears in ſome danger: Anſw. Queſtionleſs they have recourſe in their thoughts to that Prophet of theirs Will. Baily, who pronounced a dreadful ſentence againſt me, viz. that in the name of the living God I ſhould be mad, this was at Hartford, in the hearing of many, to the utter ſhame of all their Party that was there, if they had but a dram of true Humility: I am ſure to the amazement of many of us, and the abhorrency and deteſtation of ſuch Helliſh Spirits, to hear Gods holy Name prophaned in ſuch a horrible execration, in ſuch a Brazen-fac'd way, as if Satan himſelf had appeared with Fire and Brimſtone, and a naſty ſtink among us: I would be glad to hear that God gave him Repentance for his great ſin, who did not live to ſee his ſentence fulfilled; but was ſoon after cut off by death at Sea, whether Shipwrackt or otherwiſe I have not yet learned Theſe look for the fulfilling of this Prophecy I perceive, its well I am not in their hands, nor in Satans hauds, but in the hands of Jeſus Chriſt; I commit my ſelf to him, he is righteous in whatſoever he doth to me: peradventure he will turn Shimeies and Balaams curſings, and Rabſhekahs railings, for good unto me: In this caſe I appeal unto the Chriſtians and Miniſters of Chriſt, with whom I have to do, if hitherto I ſpeak not the words of truth and ſoberneſs, the Lord lay not this great evil (which they are now too much hardned in) to their charge.
Before they mention the two Inconſiſtencies, they have a ſmall Peroration about Original ſin, Pag. 13. Chriſtopher Tayler denying Infants to be guilty of it, calling them Innocents, but they dare not meddle with this Contoverſy pro nor con; only ſay that I have manifeſted a great deal of ignorance and hardneſs, but proves not a Syllable of their Charge, only craftily ſuggeſts to the People, that we condem theſe Innocents upon the Predeſtinarian principle? Anſw. We have proved Infants no Innocents, but ſuch as have the guilt of Adams ſin upon them, and I am at any time ready to make good this Truth, againſt their calumnies, and withall ſay for the ſatisfaction of all againſt this falſe inſinuation, that God is righteous in charging the guilt of the firſt ſin upon all, and that he doth not predeſtinate any to damnation but with reſpect to ſin.
But where are theſe inconſiſtencies?
1. That I ſay we are by nature children of wrath, Eph. 2.3. and yet ſaith, that the light within every one is nothing but nature which is corrupt, yet affirm withall, that this light within is the Law of Moſes written in the heart, this they ſay is to write like a mad man, Pag. 14. Anſw. The Quakers I obſerve are always much moved when we do not give that honour to their Light which they think is due, when we allow it to be no more than Nature: Now the Apoſtle I am ſure calls it Nature: Rom. 2.14. The Gentiles do by Nature things contained in the Law, and yet the ſame Apoſtle ſaith likewiſe, Eph. 2.3. And we were by Nature children of Wrath, even as others. Now, it is not I but the Apoſtle that is charged for a mad man, for they are his words: muſt the Apoſtle be guilty of mad inconſiſtencies? God forbid: I did ſay the Light within was the Law of Moſes written in the heart of man, giving that Rom. 2.15. to prove it, Which ſhew the work of the Law written in their hearts; this Scripture muſt guide in the ſenſe of my words: The Law of Moſes in the heart that I ſpake of, is the work of the Law; he doth not ſay that all the matter of the Moral Law was written in their hearts, nor that they did all things contained in it, but only ſaith the foreign, the work of the Law was written in their hearts, and that they did things contained in the Law: there is then no more in it but this, that theſe Gentiles by doing ſomethings that were contained in Moſes's Moral Law did manifeſt, that there was an impreſſion of ſome part of the Moral Law upon their hearts: Now, its no mad Hereſie to maintain, that a mans doing part of the Moral Law, as to the matter of it, by the meer ſtrength of Nature, is nothing but ſin, and that a natural man ſo doing is a Child of Wrath, and in a damnable condition not withſtanding; how can it be otherwiſe, when there is no right Principle from whence he acts,Heb. 11.6. not a dram of true Faith in Jeſus Chriſt, and without Faith it is impoſſible to pleaſe God; he is dead in ſin not being born again, and all his works are dead works, and cannot pleaſe the living God: And therefore the Apoſtle ſaith of theſe Gentiles that had done by Nature things contained in the Law, and had the works of the Law written in their hearts, notwithſtanding this they were unrighteous, ſinners, guilty, fallen ſhort of the glory of God, Rom. 3. Oh that this was but well marked by theſe Patrons of Nature, the Quakers: where is now the inconſiſtency?
2. Inconſiſtency: Becauſe I will not admit works done by us in the Spirit, in the point of the juſtication of a ſinner, and yet confeſſeth that Regeneration id the making meet for the inheritance, and that I ſay the actions of the Deity perfects all good in us, and prays that the Lord by his Spirit would eſtabliſh my Friends, ſeeming here highly to eſteem of the holy Spirit, and its workings, how ſleight ſoever I made of them in other places, Pag. 15.
Anſw. I do with all my heart highly eſteem of the Holy Spirit who is the ever bleſſed God, and of his inward work in the hearts of his Saints, and God forbid that I ſhould ſleight them, or manifeſt my madneſs (as this people ſay) againſt them: ſooner let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; I have ſome experience of that good, ſweet, Spirits working in my own heart through Grace, in his Convictions, Renewings, Quicknings, Comfortings, and I do really value them: Yet I muſt not advance theſe works done upon us by the Spirit, or done by us in the Spirit, to that dignity which God never appointed them unto, viz. To juſtify a ſinner in his ſight, to make him accepted with God for their ſakes: no, we are accepted only by the grace of God, (i. e.) his free favour, in the Beloved, Eph. 1.6. (i. e.) the Perſon of Jeſus Chriſt, and the works done in the Spirit are not the Perſon of Jeſus Chriſt, nor his Perſonal Righteouſneſs, we would know from the Quakers which would give us to underſtand their thoughts, let them ſpeak plainly and tell us, whether the Perſon of him that is juſtified, or the Perſon of Jeſus Chriſt be the ſubject of that Righteouſneſs whereby a ſinner is juſtified in Gods ſight? whether the ſoul and body of the Believer, or the ſoul and body of the Man Chriſt be the ſeat wherein dwells that Righteouſneſs that juſtifies in God ſight? whether they be the works done Perſonally by us, or the works done Perſonally by him? we are not aſhamed without mincing. without darkening counſel by words, firmly and conſtantly to confeſs with our Brethren in many Proteſtant Churches, that we cannot, dare not, muſt not, admit of any thing, no not ſo much as our Faith, (though it's wrought in us by the Spirit) into that Righteouſneſs that juſtifies us in Gods ſight, but holds ſtill, that it's ſolely and alone the Perſonal Righteouſneſs of Jeſus Chriſt the Son of God in his Active and Paſſive obedience, whereby we are juſtified, and accepted in the ſight of an Infinitely pure and holy God, who charged his Angels with folly;Gal. 1.8. and if any man or Angel preach any other Goſpel, let him be accurſed. Thus as chaſt Virgins eſpouſed, we will not (through Gods grace) ſuffer our ſelves through the ſubtilty of the Serpent, 2. Cor. 11.3.to have our minds corrupted from this ſingleneſt that is in Chriſt, in this great buſineſs of Juſtification: this Article raigned in Luthers heart he ſaid, and I deſire it ſhould raign in my heart, and it is (as that great Patron of it, againſt theſe Phareſaical Meritmongers was wont to ſay) the Article of the Churches ſtanding or falling; and how can he be a Chriſtian that is not hearty in the belief of it, though never more than at this day ſpoke againſt: Chriſt in this day is a very great ſtumbling-ſtone to the Quakers, and Socinians, as he was to the Jews and Greeks of old: it is no wonder the Quakers care not to have Chriſts Manhood maintained in its ſameneſs, truth and reality, now carrying on the work of his Mediation in Heaven, pleading the vertue of his Attonement, when as they will not own the Righteouſneſs which was wrought out, in and by that bleſſed Manhood ſixteen hundred Years ſince, for the Juſtification of ſinners: They talk much of the works of the Spirit, I would put a few Queries to them. 1. Whether the works done by the Man Chriſt, when on Earth here, and the works he now doth in Heaven be not works done in the Spirit? he had the Spirit and hath in without meaſure: were not his works abſolutely and compleatly perfect in Holineſs? he was a Lamb without ſpot, there was no guil found in his mouth, he pleaſed the Father in all things. 2. I would ask whether there be any works done by the Spirit upon any of the ſons of Men (except Jeſus Chriſt) but there ſtill remains a body of ſin in them? and whether there be any works done by us in the higheſt degree of the Spirit, that any can attain to in this world, but God can find ſome fault with them? there is ſome defect, and imperfection, let them that dare, deny that Scripture, Eccleſs. 7.20. There is not a juſt man upon Earth, that doth good and ſinneth not. 3. If this be true, which now of us are mad againſt the works of the Spirit, we that honour theſe compleat works of the perſonal Obedience of Chriſt, and receive them with thankfulneſs for our Juſtification, according to the command of God in Scripture to believe, and withall are glad that God works upon us by his Spirit to renew our evil natures after his own Image, though it be but in part, and that we are enabled by the ſame Spirit to ſhew forth any good works to his glory in our Converſation among men, though they fall ſhort of that which the holy Law requires; and therefore we dare not plead them with God, but daily prays for forgiveneſs in his Blood, and that he would accept us not in this our own Righteouſneſs within us, or without us, but in his Sons Perſonal Righteouſneſs, having union with him: or they now on the other hand, that are only and altogether for the works done in the ſpirit, both for Juſtification as well as Sanctification, though none of them can ever evince that theſe works are in every degree compleat, and at the ſame time diſown, diſpiſe, contemn the compleat works of the Imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, calling it a Doctrine of Devils, which of us is mad againſt the works done in the Spirit? Let the Reader judge. What an unſavoury lorry do many of them make in the ears of Chriſtians in their books, and diſcourſes, ſaying and writing, you look to be ſaved by a Righteouſneſs wrought out ſixteen hundred Years ſince, and as far off as Jeruſalem? we cannot but pity their blindneſs, and enmity to the Croſs of Chriſt, the Lord reveal his Sons Righteouſneſs to them, and make them aſhamed of ſuch kind of Phariſaical ſayings, as that of Bailies, viz. if this be to make our own Righteouſneſs ſtand, (ſpeaking of the Righteouſneſs of the Law) then will we go about to make them ſtand: if they would but remember that great inſtance given by Chriſt, and conſider it, its enough ſurely to ſilence them for ever, in this matter, Luke 18.9. He ſp…ke this Parable to certain that truſted in themſelves, as being righteous and deſpiſed others: verſ. 10. Two went up into the Temple to pray, &c. The Phariſee ſtood and prayed thus with himſelf, God, I thank thee, I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjuſt, adulterers, or even as this Publican. I faſt twice in the week, I give Tithes of all that I poſſeſs. Verſ. 13. And the Publican ſtanding afar of, would not lift up ſo much as his eyes to Heaven: but ſmote upon his breaſt, ſaying, God be merciful to me a ſinner. Verſ. 14. I tell you, this man went down to his houſe juſtified rather than the other. What is this inſtance of a Phariſee to a Quaker, that ſpeaks ſo much of the Spirit, and the inward works of the Spirit? Anſw. Did not the Phariſee think that he had the inward work of the Spirit? Yet ſurely, for he gives thanks to God that did inable him to be thus religious; he acknowledged that all he had, was the gift of God, and did not in the leaſt attribute it to his freewill, might or power, that he had made himſelf to differ, that he did thus faſt, pray, was thus juſt, holy, and zealous: let is be weighed, he was as confident as any Quaker, or any other could be, that his Righteouſneſs was good, of the right ſort, the Righteouſneſs of the Spirit, in that he durſt plead it before the Lord for his acceptance, yet what was the iſſue, he was not accepted: it was the humble ſinner that was juſtified, that applyed himſelf to the mercy of God in Chriſt Jeſus: but where do you at any time find this people acknowledge Grace, Mercy, Attonement, confeſſing their ſins with ſhame and humility, are theſe in the way of Juſtification?
They will ſay, why doeſt thou talk ſo of the Phariſees thinking he had the Spirit, and the inward work thereof: we know and are ſure we have it, are regenerated, and act from thence in our lives, and whilſt it is ſo, if there be any ſuch thing as imputed Righteouſneſs, (as we think there is not, its only an imagination of your own brains,) we ſhall have it, for according to you, they both go together, Righteouſneſs within and without.
I ſay to them with as great confidence and boldneſs, and much better grounded, that in caſe they go on thus, they do manifeſtly declare, that they have not, neither ever had the right Spirit of Chriſt, the Comforter, for what doth Chriſt ſay the work of the Comforter ſhould be, upon his ſending of him, John 15.26. He ſhall teſtify of me, and John 16.14. He ſhall glorify me (i. e.) in the hearts of men, for be ſhall receive of mine and ſhew it unto you: Now if that Spirit which at preſent you boaſt of, doth not this work, viz. Enlighten your underſtandings aright in the truth of the Goſpel, though you may find a power (as you often ſpeak) acting of you, if this Spirit do not teſtify of the Chriſt of God; begetting high thoughts of his Perſon, Righteouſneſs, inſtructing your ſouls in his things, his Death, Reſurrection, Interceſſion: his Prieſthood in Heaven (which you never talk of) though it ſhould have ſo much power in you as thereby you ſhould be caught up and carried to Azotus: though thereby you could (as they ſay of Simon Magus) fly in the Air, yet it is not the Spirit of Chriſt Jeſus the Comforter:1 Pet. 2.7. 2 Cor. 13.14. 2 Cor. 11.4. If Chriſt be not precious to you, you are unbelievers: I wiſh it might be conſidered, there is no communion of the Spirit, where the Grace of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt it not ſweet to us, where ever there is another Goſpel and Jeſus, there is another ſpirit, who ever hath not the Son, hath not the Father, how then can they have the Spirit? No man ſpeaking by the Spirit of God, called Jeſus accurſed, 1 Cor. 12.3. Be not deceived; if this Goſpel be hid (the heart and life whereof conſiſts in the knowledge of this point of Juſtification, (It is the Goſpel of Righteouſneſs, it manifeſts the Righteouſneſs without the Law, Rom. 3.21. therein is the Righteouſneſs of God revealed from Faith to Faith:) if this be hid (though you may be very confident) is is hid to them that are loſt, 2 Cor. 4.3. the God of this World having blinded their eyes. O that you would remember what the Apoſtle ſaid to the Galatians, who thought they had as much of the Spirits Righteouſneſs as the Quakers, being corrupted in their judgments in this very matter, yet had not caſt off their mentioning of Chriſt, but allowing him a place in their Religion:Gal. 3.1. Gal. 5.4. who hath bewitched you, and in another place, ye are fallen from Grace, and its a great convincing word, Rom. 9.31. Iſrael, which followed after the Law of Righteouſneſs did not attain to the Law of Righteouſneſs, yet were as confident as you; but I ſhall be deſpiſed for this my love, in debating this matter with you, and I doubt you will call this (as Pag. 15. you do) monſtrous and diſtracted Doctrine: The inſtances that I gave againſt Chriſtopher Tayler to prove, that we are not juſtified by works done in the Spirit are reckoned, Pag. 14. viz. Abrahams works, Davids works, Paul's and Iſaiahs works, all done in the Spirit: but not a word of anſwer to them, no, I calmly challenge them all to anſwer to them.
Only they ask a Queſtion, Is it good Doctrine to ſay that Paul when a Chriſtian, counted his ſpiritual obedience loſs and dung for Chriſt? Anſw, Yes, very good, ſound, bleſſed and comfortable Doctrine, received by Millions of Saints in Heaven and Earth: add but that which you ought, for of that I ſpeak, viz. in the point of Juſtification: in the ſame way are you to underſtand that of Iſaiah, Iſa. 64.6. all our Righteouſneſſes are as filthy rags, (i. e.) as to juſtify us in Gods ſight: Pag. 15. they repeat the Queſtion, but ſlily addeth this to it, viz. and that as a Chriſtain he muſt ſuffer the loſs of this, (i. e.) his ſpiritual obedience, ſo as not to have it in his heart: O the creeping Serpent, to inſinuate as if I taught the people ſuch Doctrine. Anſw. Yes, he was to have it ſtill in his heart, but not to plead it with God for his Juſtification, Phil. 3.9. not having my own Righteouſneſs, which is of the Law, &c. But how can I make that out, for which they quarrel me here? Pag. 15. That all the Righteouſneſs that all the Saints have within them or without them, is but the Righteouſneſs of the Law. Anſw. It is not difficult, otherwiſe the Law of God is not a perfect Rule of Righteouſneſs, but that muſt be grante: Ergo, it requires all we do and more then any can do, not only outward duty, but an inward ſpiritual upright frame of heart, yea the Image of God to be compleat and perfect in us: then my Argument holds good, we are not juſtified by any Righteouſneſs of ours done in the Spirit, for the Scripture is peremptory in it, by the deeds of the Law, ſhall no fleſh be juſtified in his fight, Rom. 3.20.
They produce two Scriptures here to prove Juſtification by the works of the Spirit in us. Firſt, Rom. 8.2. The Law of the Spirit of life in Chriſt Jeſus, hath made me free from the Law of ſin and death: Rom. 8.4. That the Righteouſneſs of the Law might be fulfilled in us: I have opened both theſe places in my Book againſt Crook and Bailie, I am of that mind that they both ſpeak as to our Juſtification, of the Righteouſneſs of Chriſts Perſon, ſo they are nothing to their purpoſe: if they will in their next, plainly and openly ſay from the firſt Scripture, that the Spirits work in us is the matter of our Juſtification; and that the Law is fulfilled in our own perſons, for our acceptation from the ſecond Scripture, I promiſe them a fuller anſwer: in the mean while, we are of this mind, that we are not juſtified by any works done by us, in and by the Spirit: yet we freely acknowledge, that it is Regeneration makes us meet for the Kingdom, but not in a way of Merit, that is only by the blood-ſhedding of Jeſus Chriſt, but only diſpoſeth us for Heaven, without it none ſhall ſee the Lord: Regeneration is to be diſtinguiſhed from Juſtification, as the Cauſe from the Effect, Juſtification the cauſe of Regeneration, if God did not forgive us our ſins for the Merit of Chriſt, he would not renew our nature: we confeſs again, that the Deity perfects all good in us, and for us, but them the Humanity is in union with it, and acts with it, and they muſt not be put aſunder: it was the Humanity that was the Offering and Sacrifice, he offered himſelf by the eternal Spirit, Heb. 9.14. The Fleſh profiteth nothing, (i. e. alone) it is the Spirit that quickneth, John 6.63. yet the Fleſh of Chriſt is the Organ and Inſtrument in by and with which Chriſt performs all his Mediatory works of Redemption, and theſe two Natures are but one Perſon: and whatever was done by the Spirit in the hearts of any, before Chriſts manifeſtation in Fleſh, it was done in reference to, and for the Merit of his Incarnation: ſo then in the laſt place (and then we have not left a hoof of an exception behind) when I pray that the Spirit would ſettle, ſtrengthen, preſerve, I believe that the Spirit is given thus to work, becauſe Chriſt died for us: John 16.17. If I go not away the Comforter will not come; it is given by vertue of Chriſts entring with his Blood into Heaven: by this time the things I have written, the Reader will ſee, conſiſt well together.
There remains nothing now, but ſome bitter ſcornful Reflexions; let us patiently hear them, with my Anſwers:
Pag. 15. This man (ſay they) can caſt the Law of the Spirit behind his back, and yet plead, he is juſtified by the Imputation of Chriſts Perſonal Righteouſneſs, O groſs Hypocriſy.
Anſw. Could the Quakers at Hartford prove againſt me the wilful breach of the Law of God that I did indulge my ſelf in, or that I had preched or written only for the Imputation of Chriſts Perſonal Righteouſneſs for Juſtification, and not for Holineſs of Life and Sanctification, they might then indeed ſpeak at this rate, but if they cannot, it is no leſs than a notorious ſlander: I can ſay (through Grace) as the Apoſtle, I know nothing by my ſelf as to any known ſin I live in, with him will I ſay again, yet am not I hereby juſtified, but be that judgeth me is the Lord, 1 Cor. 4.4. I live in the obſervance of the Moral Law, but yet I dare not plead this for acceptance with God, knowing I come not up to perfection, but my prayer to God ſhall be that of Davids, Pſal. 143.2. Enter not into judgment with thy ſervant: for in thy ſight ſhall no man living be juſtified: I will take up that of Job, Job 9.15. Whom, though I were righteous, yet would I not anſwer, but I would make ſupplication to my Judge. Verſ. 21. Though I were perfect, yet would I not know my ſoul, believing with that perfect and upright man (of whom God gave this Teſtimony, There was none like him on Earth, one that feared God, and eſcewed evil, Job 1.8) believing what he ſaid, would prove true, Job 9.30, 31. If I waſh my ſelf with ſnow water, and make my hands never ſo clean: yet ſhalt thou plunge me in the ditch, and mine own cloaths ſhall make me to be abhorred: and is this a crime, muſt this be cenſured for groſs Hypocriſy? was David, Job, Paul, or the Phariſee the Hypocrite? The Phariſee juſtified himſelf, and deſpiſed the Croſs of Chriſt, and went about to make his own righteouſneſs to ſtand: Job and David confeſſed their ſins, and ſo did Paul, Phil. 3.9. Counting all dung for Chriſt, not having his own Righteouſneſs, which was of the Law: but was very much for Imputation, he names it ten times at leaſt in the fourth of the Romans: have the Quakers at Hartford attained to ſuch a perfection in Holineſs, by the Law of the Spirit? and is it diſcernable in their Converſe and Trading, that they have no need of the Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, but deride it and make a ſcoff at it? The Lord have mercy on them.
They jeer me for any Apology to Sir John Hartop, Pag. 16.in caſe that I had not worded things in my Book ſo congruouſly as I might, that he would bear with me, they ſay, this is a Salve for all my diſtracted and incongruous works. Anſw. Had I been one of theſe infallible Doctors, I need not to have apologized, but I pretend not to Infallibility, eſpecially in words: I am not aſhamed to ſpeak in humility of my ſelf, and of my own labours, and to think what I ſay, not to pretend only (as they ſuggeſt) remembring what the great Apoſtle ſaid of himſelf, 1 Cor. 2.3. I was with you in weakneſs, and in fear, and in much trembling, and that he with others of his fellow Apoſtles and Labourers in the Miniſtry, did but know in part, and propheſie in part. Eph. 6.19, 20. He was not too proud, to deſire the Chriſtians prayers for a door of utterance, that he might open his mouth, and ſpeak the Myſtery of the Goſpel boldly, as he ought to ſpeak.
But the People of Hartford are to perſwade me to be quiet among my neighbours, and the Quakers would have them give me no more money for keeping Chriſt and them at a diſtance.
The preſent Incendiaries need no more, they had done their work, could they by any means take off the Watch from their duty: the King of France had done his work, could any perſwade the Dutch to be quiet, and to give their Souldiers no more pay: could the Wolf prevail with the Sheep, that the Spepherd might ſtay at home, it would make well for him. The falſe Apoſtles did all they could to exclude the true Apoſtles, that they themſelves might be affected, Gal. 4.17. I would if poſſible, live peaceably with all men; but is it poſſible, while there is another Jeſus, and another Goſpel ſet up at Hartford? Paul and Luther would have turned the world upſide down had they dwelt there: it was a great man that ſaid, let Heaven and Earth be in confuſion, rather then one dram of Truth be loſt: what peace, as long as the whoredomes continue! but, you muſt give me no Money. Simon Magus thought all things in Chriſts kingdom was carried on by Money, therefore he thought to tempt the Apoſtle with Money. Doth not this ſaying argue the ſame Spirit? its well if their Religion be not propagated that ſame way, we know in a great part it is; let me now ſpeak this plain word to you Chriſtians at Hartford, the Quakers having adminiſtred this occaſion to me, take heed leſt they inſnare you by the gain and trade of the world, they know they have a hank upon you this way already, ſome of the Town they have won to them by this means: others have abated in their zeal for Chriſt, fearing to loſe their worldly intereſt among the Quakers.
But they ſay, I keep Chriſt and you at a diſtance; therefore you muſt give me no Money.
Anſw. They acknowledge in many places in their Book, that I own Chriſt to be preſent by his Spirit in his Saints, and do not the People at Hartford witneſs that I preach this Doctrine among them? how then do I keep Chriſt and you at a diſtance? are not we united to him by the Spirit? it is I ſuppoſe becauſe I have not yet taught you the Hartford Quakers new notion, viz. That the ſoul of Chriſts Manhood is in every one of you, and in every Saint throughout the world; thus they have brought Chriſt and their Hearers together, and deſerves Money for their new invention of an Immenſe, Infinite, Inviſible, Inform, Spirituous Manhood, that can pierce doors, and then be ſure come into your bodies, a Manhood turned all into Soul, or an Angel, or into Wind, Fancy, Nothing.
Laſt of all, They tell me I boaſt in ſaying my Book is unanſwered by them, they ſay it is not ſtrictly true, for an anſwer hath been written a long time, but not publiſhed.
Anſw. If I ſay, the Sun was not riſen at four of the Clock this morning it is not (may theſe men ſay) ſtrictly true, in that it was ſhining at that hour, though in another Horizon, only it did not then appear, it was not publiſhed: if I ſay of a Child in the womb, it is not yet come into the world, the Quakers will ſay it is not ſtrictly true, is not the Mothers womb in the world? only it ſtayeth there, and is not come through the place of the breaking forth of Children: John Crook had his Anſwer firſt written in his mind, before it was in his Paper, it was not then ſtrictly true, but that there was an Anſwer, before the Anſwer was written, as well as before it was publiſhed: ſo witty are theſe people, we know not how to ſpeak the plain Truth, as to matter of fact, to them.
But I had not beſt talk too loud, for if I ſhould, it may occaſion the publication of it, and that (they ſay) will not be for my credit, and that if it comes out, I ſhall have need of a better Antidote, this is their Concluſion.
Here is the ſame Inſinuation in the clauſe of this Book, as was in the end of Chriſtopher Tayler's Poſtcript, he ſaid had more againſt me then he would write: theſe ſay that the anſwer to my Book will not be for my credit when it is publiſhed, why are they ſtill ſo like the Jeſuits, going about if poſſible to take away our good name and credit from us? But it may be, they mean only becauſe it will be ſuch a full and clear Refutation of my Book: Truth is ſtrong and bold, that I fear not, try it as ſoon as you will, or dare.
But they give me fair warning to provide a better Antidote, here is a tacit Conceſſion then, that there will be a ſtronger poyſon than uſual in the future Anſwer: however, I have but one and the ſame, and there needs no other Antidote, it is ſufficient againſt all the deadly poyſon, inchantments, divinations, errors of the Socinians, Quakers, Ranters, Mugletonians, Papiſts in this day, viz. That ſoveraign anointing, ſpoken of in 1 Joh. 26, 27. Theſe things have I written unto you concerning them that ſeduce you; but the anointing which you have received of him, abideth in you: and ye need not that any man teach you: but, as the ſame anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie: and even as it hath taught you, ye ſhall abide in him.
Now, ſee what miſchief theſe men have done to the Chriſtian Religion, how ſacrilegiouſly they have robbed the Curch of many ſweet and comfortable Truths that the Saints in all ages have lived by Faith upon, as their life and treaſure, in all their failings, weakneſſes, and imperfections, tryals, temptations, afflictions, deſertions, for if Chriſt be not the ſame real, true Man in Heaven that he was here upon Earth, (which the Quakers have here denied, while in ſome wo…ds they confeſs it,) then it follows, according to what I writ in my laſt Book, which I deſire may be peruſed again, 1. There is no Interceſſor, no high Prieſt to appear in the preſence of God for us, for according to his real Humane Nature, as well as Divine, he is Mediator. 2. Then is there no entring for us into Heaven, for the way thither was conſecrated for us through the vail of his Fleſh, that was his Manhood, by that he went to prepare a place. 3. Then is there no Spirit to be expected, nor any gift thereof, for the ſhedding of it forth was the fruit of his Aſcention as Man. 4. He is not now Lord and King, for according to his Manhood he was exalted above all Principalities and Powers. 5. Then ſhall Chriſt never come again perſonally to be Judge of quick and dead: for as Man he is to judge the World, Acts 17.31. He will judge the world in righteouſneſs, by that Man, &c. This Truth is openly denied by the Quakers, and no wonder. 6. Then hath Chriſt no fellow-feeling with us in our ſtraits, for it's only as to his Manhood that he was made like to us, and tempted as we ase; he is now neither a merciful nor faithful high Prieſt if his Manhood doth not remain, Heb. 2.17. And laſtly, we cannot then come unto him with any boldneſs in prayer, but ſhall be amazed and confounded in the thoughts of the glorious Majeſty of God, if He hath not rendred himſelf familiar to us, by taking our Humane Nature upon him, and ſtill retaining it in union with his Deity: upon this it is that we are bid to come boldly to the Throne of Grace, Heb. 4. ult. Becauſe we have an high Prieſt, that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all things tempted as we are.
FINIS.
End of the text · William Haworth, Animadversions Upon a Late Quibbling (1676)