The Weapons of Quakerism the Weakness of Quakerism, Chapter 5
CHAP. V. Of Christ, and of his Benefits.
THE Quakers in words, commonly acknowledge that Christ is God and Man, and account it a wrong, when they are accused of the denyal thereof: But beside these two Natures they really maintain a third, viz. a Spiritual and Heavenly nature in Christ, which they call the Heavenly man, Christ Jesus, which heavenly man, they say, did exist before the incarnation of Christ Jesus, and assert, that on the Flesh and Blood of this man, the Church in all Ages did feed. For George Keith in his way cast up, pag 38, 93, 96. Sayeth, Christ as Man, was and is before all, the first and the last, Id: pag 90. The Man Christ influenceth all Men by his life, and is in them; and pag 93. The word made flesh created all things, and the word only is is not properly the Christ.And George Keith in that Book contendeth at large, that Christ before his Incarnation was as properly the Christ as he is now. And in the same book pag. 94 he sayeth Christ as man came down from Heaven Idem ibid. Christs Flesh and Blood came down from Heaven. pag. 94, 95, Thus Christ hath Spiritual Flesh and Blood, pag 95. Of his Spiritual flesh and blood did the Saints of old eat & drink. pag 97.98. He saith, The Man Christ is to be understood prov. 8.23, I was set up from everlasting from the beginning, or ever the earth was. And Ps. 110.1, 2, 3. and pag 99, 100, 108. It was this life of Christ as Man, that was pressed as a Cart &c. Amos 2.13. pag 100.108, 109. Thus (saith he) Apostats crucifie to themselves again the Son of God. Heb. 6.6. pag. 100. Thus hath Christ been crucified by the wicked from the beginning. Ibid. Christ the Heavenly man lived in Abraham and Moses. pag 102. Christ was true, and real Man before he was born of Mary, pag 103. The word was made flesh from the beginning and dwelt in us. pag 104. According to his Heavenly Nature, even as Man, He (Christ) was the son of God. pag. 123. The Man Christ is every where, That is, his Soul is extended into all, in his divine seed and body, which is his Heavenly Flesh and Blood. From all which, beside other most horrid absurdities and blasphemies which follow upon this their Doctrine, this is a clear consequent, That Christ hath three Natures. To this they answer Quak. Confir: p. 33▪ That it will no more follow from their Doctrine, that Christ hath three natures, than it will follow from ours, who assert that Christ assumed into Vnion with the Divine nature, a Body, and a Soul. But this answer is easily repelled, for a Body & a Soul considered both together make up but one humane nature: Whereas according to their Doctrine, he was Man before his incarnation, and again man by incarnation, seing every incarnation bringeth a man to the World: Which incarnation they have not yet denyed (at least in words) And therefore Christ hath two entire humane Natures, and yet these strictly conjoyned together in one man. Which doctrine maketh our blessed Lord a down-right Monster.
2. The Quakers doctrine, as it rendereth the Humanitie of Christ altogether Monstruous, so it quite annihilateth, and destroyeth his Divinity. For Christopher Atkinson a known Quaker in a book of his entituled The Sword of the Lord in oposition to the sixth of the propositions (which Philip Nye, Thomas Godwine, and Sidrah Simson drew up at the appointment of Cromwel, whereby he might regulate himself in the tolleration of Sectaries) viz. Christ is God, said, Hear Sotish minds your imagined God beyond the Stars, and your carnal Christ which ye would make appear through your Heathnish Philosophy, is utterly denyed, and testified against by the light. In these words the God-head of Christ is so evidently denyed, ye…, and his manhood too, that the Quakers are able to put no Commentarie, or glosse upon them (which is their usual custom, whereby to varnish, and make any thing speak what they will) And therefore to the Students of Aberdeen who Quak. Canvass. pag. 82. Have objected this passage unto them, they answer Quak. Conf. pag 36 that they cannot light upon Aitkinsons book. But it is not to be believed that such active, and bussie Spirits for the promotion of Quakerisme, as Robert Barclay and George Keith are, men of so great acquaintance; and correspondence with the Quakers in England could not obtain the sight of a book, which certainly is frequent enough there. But it mattereth not much what they say, for they stick not to deny passages that are verbatim in their own books. Of which kind of dealing take one place of many which might easily be given Will: Pen, Sand: Found: pag 26 sayeth, that Christ fulfilled the Law only as our pattern or example. And yet Rea…: against Rail. pag 78 counteth his adversary Hicks a forger for repeating these words, and stif…y denyeth that there is such a passage there, saying, I am very certain that the word (only) was not there. See Hicks Dial. 3. pag 74, 75, 76. Where you shall find a large bundle of the like impudent, and inexcusable lies. They say also, they can prove, that Christopher Aitkinson was not a Quaker, which they may easily say; but they ought to have proved it, not said it only, otherwise these words serve only to testifie their dissatisfaction, with the ingenuous plainness of Aitkinson, in which he unma…keth, and …ayeth open to the World, what the rest of the Quakers involve in Clouds of strange and mysterious Language, equivocal, and hardly intelligible terms; being the only covert, that they can find under which to shreud their abominable Doctrine. Lastly, say they, If he deny Christ … be Man, we disown him, who do say that Christ is both God, and M…n. This is a good confession▪ And a man that knew them not, might easily thin… that we wronged them, by charging them wit… the denyal of the Divinity of Christ. But notwithstanding hereof, this confession serveth only to prove these Men guilty, of most wicked hypocrisie, lying, and self Contradiction to put a cheat upon the World, and cover their abominations: For whosoever taketh but an overly veiw of the passages above cited of George Keiths way cast up; he may clearly see, that if these passages be true Doctrine, the greatest arguments, for establishing the Divinity of Christ are for ever gone. For I appeal to the writings of all who have refu…ed the Doctrine of Arrius and Socinus, if prov. 8.23. Be not brought as one of the main texts to prove the Eternity, and Divinity of Christ; as also Psal. 110 by which Christ himself silenced, and for ever stopped the mouths of the Pharisees, who denyed his God-head, Matth. 22, 43, 44, 45, 46. Neither is there a greater argument, than that by him all things were Created: And yet if these forecited passages be true, the denyers of Christs Divinity have an easie answer, that all these things are verified of Christ as man only; And so the greatest arguments for the Divinitie of Christ fall to the Ground. Now let any man judge if the Quakers do not what in them lye to overthrow the Divinity of Christ, seeing they endeavour to undermine, and destroy all the arguments by which it is underpropped. Moreover this Doctrine robbeth God of his incommunicable attributs, in ascribing Omnipresence, or Ubiquitie to a Man. But before I leave this point, I propose this dilemma to the Quakers.
If all things were created by Christ as Man, then either the Manhood of Christ is created or not; if created, then it is created by it self, than which there is nothing more absurd; If uncreated, then there is an uncreated man, and a man that is coeternal with God. Which Blasphemie its hardly able to equalize, far lesse to outdo. From all which it is most evident, that the Quakers doe what in them lyeth, to evert the fundamental Doctrines and basis of the Christian Religion viz. the Godhead of Christ. And in this they are more wicked, than the professed Arrians, or Socinians, that they add deep dissimulation, and hypocrisie to their horrid impiety, whereas the Arrians and Socinians more ingenuous than they, profess in words what they really believe. It is also clear that in stead of their Christ, they embrace a meer chimerical non▪ entity: seing there is nothing more contradictiorie, than that either the Soul or the Body of a man, which is a meer creature, can be every where, or from Eternitie. Lastly observe that the Quakers put no distinction betwixt their Christ, and their light within, and that the light within is nothing but the smal dark Relicts of the Image of God, or the dimm light of nature, as we have already evinced. And so their Christ, their God, and all that is dear unto them, resolve at length into this almost quenched spunk, in which, all who have trusted, in stead of finding the safe port of Eternal happiness, have alwayes met with certain Shipwrack.
In favours of this Spiritual AntiChrist, or Antichristian figment, which they account for their Christ, they decry, vilifie, and do what they can to overthrow whatever ought to be precious and dear to a Christian (for what will they not deny, seing they deny the Godhead of Christ) they therefore with open mouth blaspheme, and deny Jesus Christ as a person without them, or as any thing distinct from their Imaginary Christ, or light within, of many which we could cite, take a few passages for proof hereof; & first Geo: Whith: Dip. Pl. pag 13. Jesus Christ a person without us, is not Scripture Language, but the Anthropomorphits, and Mugletonians. And in his Appen: to Reas▪ against Rail: pag 21. The Socinian telleth us of a personal Christ, and that the man Christ Jesus our Lord hath in Heaven a place remote from Earth, a humane body, but doth he believe him to be the eternal God, while he imagineth him to be a personal Christ, a humane Body so Limited, and confined to a remotness? And William Pen counterfit christian pag 77▪ 78. Give me one place, that mentioneth Christ to be a distinct person without us, art thou destitute of common Sense▪ as to think of proving the Quaker no christian, because he denyeth, that Doctrine not expressed in the Scripture? George Fox Great Myst: 206 If there be any other Christ, but he that was crucified within, he is the false Christ, and he that hath not this Christ that was risen, and crucified within, is a reprobate▪ Though Devils and reprobats may make a talk of him without. And Great Myst: pag 207 God's Christ is not distinct from his Saints▪ nor his Body, for he is within them, not distinct from their Spirits. Ib. pag 16. Such are deceived that say, Christ is distinct from His Saints. Moreover the Quakers Doctrins & Principles of the Priests in Scotland pag 33 in opposition to Mr. Henry Foreside, who said, that Christ mourned over Jerusalem as He was Humane; answer, as for the Word (Humane) it is not Scripture Language, it speaketh not that Language. Certainly by this speech of these Quakers no other thing can be understood, but that Christ hath no Humane Nature: For though the word (Humane) were not found in the Scripture, if the thing imported by it be found in Scripture▪ then they must confesse themselves to have been ridiculous, and purposeless pratlers, which I believe they will not do: and therefore its evident that they deny the Humane Nature of Christ. Again the Quakers speak, as contemptibly of the Body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, as if he were the basest of Men, as these words of Isaac Peningtoun witnesse, can outward blood cleanse? We must enquire therefore, saith he, whether it was the blood of the Vail? Or of that Spiritual Man, viz. of Flesh, Blood, and bones which took on Him the Vail, or Humane Nature? And the Mystery of iniquitie Lyeth in the Blood of Christ, sayeth Edward Billings: And Hubberthorn in his reply to Mr. Sherlock who had said, that Christ was not capable of Faith and Repentance, saith, here I charge thee to be a lyar, and Slanderer; for he was capable of Faith, and Repentance. What then is clearer than that according to these Mens Doctrin…, the Spotless Lamb of God was really defiled with sin and stood in need of another Saviour to believe in? Moreover (as we have already heard) they still distinguish between the outward & inward body of Christ, wickedly & absurdly ascribing to their imaginarie inward body of Christ, all that the Scripture attributeth to the Blessed Body of Christ, that dyed at Ierusalem, such as sufferings, Death, Resurrection, and …he like, by which distinction they render as much as in them lyeth, the passion, Death and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus at Ierusalem, altogether vain and idle actions. And in favours of this their inward body, they call the body that our Lord took of the Virgin Mary, only a garment: and that it's no constituent of Christ; and that Luke 2.26. Where its said, that it was revealed to Simeon, that he should not dye, till he should see the Lord's Christ, is to be understood of a Spiritual sight, or of seeing the Christ within, Will. Pen. Rej. to Iohn Faldo part 2th: c. 9.
4. As these men deny Christ himself, so they deny consequently all the benefits purchased by him: For they say that Christ dyed only to be a pattern and example to Believers; hence Will. Pen▪ sandy found: pag. 26 sayeth, unless we become doers of that Law, which Christ came not to destroy, but as our example to fulfill, we can never be Iustified before God: Nor let any fancy that Christ hath so fulfilled it for them, as to exclude their obedience from being requisite to their acceptance, but only as their pattern. Thus it is evident that the Quakers are altogether Socinians in their Judgments of the ends of the death of Christ, and so joyn themselves closs with them, and Papists in the Doctrine of Justification; yea, Rob. Bar. denieth not but that his Doctrine of Justification is all one with that of the Counsel of Trent. For the proof of which let the reader compare Mr. Brown Chap. 13. N. 8. with Rob. Barclay his Vindication Sect. 8. N. 1. and Apol, p. 137.139. He accuseth Luther, and the Body of the Primitive protestants, as great depravers of the Doctrine of Iustification, & doers of as great hurt by this their doctrine, as ever they did good, by what they brok down of Babylon.
But I will give you their doctrine yet more fully in their own words, & first Will. Pen, serious Apol: pag 148. Hath these words. and indeed this we deny viz. Justification by the righteousness that Christ fulfilled in his own person for us; wholly without us, and boldly affirm in the Name of the Lord to be a doctrine of Devils, and an arm of the Sea of Corruption, which now doth deludge the World. And again Edward Burrows p. 33. To that query of Philip Binnet viz. Whether none be accounted righteous in the sight of God, in whom is any Corruption, or failing, or who do not fulfill the Law, and answer every demand of Justice? Answereth thus, Here thou polluted Beast makes it manifest what thou hast been driving at all this while; which is that thou would have thy corruption, and filthiness to be accounted righteousness in Gods sight. that so thou mayest wallow in filthiness; but Iohn sayeth, he that commits sin is of the Devil, the Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the Devil, and thou Man of Sin would have it stand. God doeth not accept any, where there is any failing, or who do not fullfill the Law, and answer every demand of Justice. And Will. Pen Reas: against Rail. pag 80. We must not conceive that his, viz. Abrahams personal offering, was not a justifying righteousness, but that God was pleased to count it so; nor was there any imputation of anothers Righteousness to Abraham: but on the contrary, his personal obedience, was the ground of that just imputation, therefore that any should be justified by anothers righteousness imputed, and not inherent in him, is both ridiculous, and dangerous. Edward Burrows pag 32. Thou Beast to whom the plagues of God are due, and upon whom the wrath of God must be accomplished, who would have another righteousness than that which Christ worketh in the Saints. Pen. San: Fund: pag 25. Justification is not from the imputation of anothers Righteousness, but from the actual performing, and keeping of Gods righteous statutes, Ibid. pag 25.30. It is a great abomination to say, God should condemn, and punish his innocent Son, that he having satisfied for our sins, we might be justified by the imputation of of his perfect righteousness. Why should this horrible thing be contended for by Christians.
5. With the like f…cility I could shew, that the Doctrine of the Quakers is in every point contrarie to the Doctrine of Christ; contradicting, and vilifying all his Ordinances, and denying all his benefits. I shall content my self with one great instance viz. Of the Resurrection of the dead. Concerning which point, the Quakers are downright Sadducees: For, in the hearing of many witnesses Geo: Whitehead said, This Body shall not rise again. Hicks Quak: appeal ans▪ pag 21. and Will: pen. Reas. against Rail. p. 133. Such a Resurrection is inconsistent with the Scripture Reason, and the belief of all Men right in their wits. And Ibid: pag 34. For shame, Let us not make such stirr against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, for the absurdity of that is rather outdone, than equaled by this carnal Resurrection: And the same William Pen in his Invalidity, (I should have said his Validitie, seeing he all along Justifieth his adversaries charges) of Mr. Faldos Vindication, hath a Chapter prolix enough to defend his down right Sadducism. Yea what is more clear in all the Scriptures than Christs visible appearance to judgment: And yet Geo: Whith. Christ Ascended (so, that according to him he shall never descend) pag 22. Sayeth, they are like to be deceived, who are expecting that Christs second coming will be a personal coming.And Ib. he denyeth, that he shall come visibly; for although, sayeth he, He shall come in the like manner, yet every like is not the same. And no wonder it is, that the Quakers deny the visible return of Christ to Judgement, seing they deny that Christ hath any personal being without men. Thus speaketh the same Author pag 18. And again pag 69. Christ in person, remot in a Body of Flesh, and not in Men, is not Scripture Language; but added. But it is needless to adduce moe passages to shew the detestableness of this Seck, enough being said already to discover it. I shall only add the words of a Leading Quaker related by Hicks Quak: Appeal: Ans. pag 12. who being asked what he thought of Christ Jesus born at Bethlehem, and dying at Ierusalem? answered, Iesus Christ at Ierusalem a Type, a Figure, a shadow that is passed away; what have you to do with Christ at Ierusalem; have done with him. From all this it is evident, that according to the Quakers, there is not such a thing now in beeing, as Christ Jesus that died at Jerusalem. And as they deny Christ the Son of God, so they arrogat to themselves by a most Diabolical Sacriledge, whatsoever the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures hath appropriated to Christ Jesus; of which Lucifer-like aspiring take a taste, Iosiah Coal an eminent Quaker, thus writeth to Geo: Fox,
Dear Geo: Fox
who art the Father of many Nations, whose life hath reached through us thy Children, even to the Isles afar off, unto the begetting of many to a lively hope, for which generations to come shall call thee blessed, whose beeing, and habitation is in the power of the highest, in which thou rules, and Governs in Righteousness, and thy Kingdom is Established in peace, and the increase thereof without end:
Date 21. day of the 12 MonethMonth 1658.
See Tyr: detected pag 19.