considered as God-Man If by the Saviour of his People he means such a Saviour as saves them with eternal Salvation and makes them Heirs of God and Co heirs with Christ I say without all Faith either explicit or implicit That some of the Gentiles who endeavoured to live up to some Moral Principles discovered to them by the Light in their Consciences and the Improvements that their reasonable Faculties made being enlightned thereby by viewing the Works of Creation and general Providence had a kind of Faith and Hope in God that prompted them to expect Temporal Blessings and some Temporal Rewards from the Observation they could make that Divine Providence did ordinarily bestow such Blessings upon Men that were morally honest may and ought to be granted But this is not the Faith of God's Elect and of the Heirs of eternal Salvation that is grounded upon the Faithful Word of God and his Faithful Promises first delivered to his Holy Prophets and Apostles and by them to us even such a word of Faith as that It is a faithful saying that Jesus Christ is come into the World to save Sinners 1 Tim. 1.15 For to him gave all the Prophets witness as Peter preached to Cornelius that whoever believeth in him should receive remission of Sins Acts 10.43 God's Promises come not to Men nor ever came to them by the common Dictates of the Light within whither they call it God or the Word or the Spirit there are diversities of Operations Gifts and Ministrations inward as well as outward of one God one Lord and one Spirit who is over all in all and through all It is but a faint Hope and Faith that Men can have in God without the Promises and without all special Revelation The knowledge of God's Goodness discoverable by the Light in every Conscience in the Works of Creation and Providence may give Men that are morally honest some probable Faith that he will be favourable to them But the infallible ground of certainty concerning eternal Life and Salvation none ever had or can have without the Promises and special Revelation For all the Light and Knowledge that the Ephesian Gentiles had in their meer Gentile State Paul told That at that time they were without hope and without the Promises and aliens and strangers to the common-wealth of Israel Eph. 2.12 An indigent Man that knows a good Man that is able to help him yet he is not sure that he will help him unless he has his promise and some particular intimation of his mind but if he have that then his Faith hath sure footing But the Faithful have not only God's Word and Promises but confirmed by his Oath that by two immutable things they might have strong Confidence and Hope that is as an Anchor sure and stedfast and which enters within the Vail whither the Fore-runner hath gone But there is nothing of this sort of Faith that I can find as any-wise necessary or essential to the Religion here described in this Treatise of W.P. but pure Deism and at best refined Paganism all along as will further appear in what follows I find in Page 50 of the same Treatise a quite differing Definition of Faith which if not plainly contradictory to the former is very disingenous and full of Equivocation but whatever way it be taken if he adhere to it and allow it to be a proper Definition where the Definition it self in the parts of it ought to be essential to the thing defined and such as the thing defined cannot be without it yields as sufficient Argument against his Position That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith His Definition is this Faith is yielding up to the requirings of God's Spirit in us in full assurance of the Remission of Sins that are past through the Son of his love and Life everlasting Several things are faulty in this Definition First That he confounds the Effect or Concomitant of Faith with Faith it self for the yielding up or Resignation to God's Requirings is rather an Effect or Concomitant of Faith than Faith it self especially in the present case as it hath respect to the Rule which determines what is to be believed or assented unto upon the Credit of Divine Authority Secondly That he makes Remission of Sins to be antecedent and prior to Faith which is the Error of the Antinomians and plainly contradictory to the Scripture that holds forth both Repentance and Faith to be necessary Requisites in order to Forgiveness Thirdly That he makes full Assurance of Remission of Sins to be of the Nature of Faith whereas there is a Faith of Adhesion that is true Faith that many of the Faithful have who have not arrived to that full Assurance But that which I principally notifie in this his last Definition is That he makes this full Assurance of the Remission of Sins to be through the Son of God's love Where that the Equivocation and Fallacy may be discovered I ask him what he means by the Son of his Love through which this Assurance if Remission of Sins is obtained If he means by the Son of his Love only the Light within every Man's Conscience it is a palpable Equivocation and inserted on purpose to deceive the Christian Readers who generally by Mens having Remission of Sins through the Son of God's Love do understand the Son of God's Love to be the Word Incarnate to wit Jesus Christ God-man as he died for our Sins by his Death to purchase to us the Pardon of them But this sense of the words which is the true Scripture sense and the sense of all true Christians W.P. doth not admit if he adhere to what he hath said both here and in his other Books for in his Serious Apology Page 146. he saith in behalf of himself and Brethren That that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem was properly the Son of God we utterly deny And here in this Book he makes it not any of the absolute Necessaries in Religion but some considerable Matters superadded P. 44. That God was manifested extraordinarily in the Flesh that he gave his Life for the World that such as believe and obey his Grace in their Hearts receive Remission of Sins and Life everlasting But which way soever he understands these words The Son of God's Love seeing he makes the Rule of every Man's Faith not to be the Words of God declaring his Promise of Forgiveness as outwardly delivered in the Holy Scriptures but the Light in every Man's Conscience he is bound to give us some better proof than his simple Affirmation That the Light in every Man's Conscience or indeed in any Man's conscience reveals to him God's Will to forgive Sins without all special Revelation or Declaration of God's Will as contained in the Holy Scriptures seeing the Holy Scriptures do hold it forth as one of the great Secrets and Mysteries of God's Will declared to Men by the special Revelation of the Holy
Spirit through his Holy Prophets and Apostles even Remission of Sin and Free Justification by Jesus Christ through Faith in him and not by any Works or Obedience that either the Jew did perform to the outward Law or the Gentile did perform to the Law writ in the Heart When Peter preached Remission of Sin by Faith in Jesus Christ whom the Jews hang'd on the Tree to Cornelius he confirm'd this Doctrine not from the eternal Precepts in every Man's Conscience or the common Dictates of the Light in every Man but from the general Testimony of the Prophets Acts 10.43 To him said Peter give all the Prophets witness that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive Remission of Sins But according to W. P's Doctrine the Apostle Peter should have said To him the Light in every Conscience gave the Dictates of that Light in every Conscience witness That whosoever gave up to the Requirings of the Light in them without all Faith in Christ God-man without them shall receive the Remission of their Sins And seeing whatever is the Rule of Faith must teach us all that is needful to Salvation by it self as W.P. argueth he must prove that the Light in every Man's Conscience dictateth to him this Proposition That is thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10.9 Or if it doth dictate some other way than this then that and the like places of Scripture contradict the Dictates of the Light within But that this Proposition laid down Rom. 10.9 is no Dictate of the Light within in Mens Consciences is evident from W. P's plain Confession P. 32 33. who saith That the Light within should tell us that Christ suffered Death and rose again is not needed inasmuch as an account of that is extant in Scripture Whereby it plainly appears he holds it not needful to our Salvation to believe that Proposition Rom. 10.9 seeing the Light within that is the Rule of Faith doth not reveal it and such Revelation is not necessary and consequently according to him the belief of that Proposition Rom. 10.9 is not necessary to any for Salvation And if that be not necessary by the same method of Argument according to W.P. nor is the belief of all the other parts of Scripture necessary to Salvation which are not the common Dictates of the Light in every Conscience The only use of the whole Scripture according to W.P. is meerly Historical which though perhaps true is nowise necessary to our Salvation to believe the truth of it but we are left at liberty to believe or disbelieve all and every part of what is contained in the Scripture without any danger to our Salvation excepting these few absolute necessaries that the Light within every Conscience teacheth us as well as the Scriptures But none of all the twelve Articles of the Apostle's Creed according to the true Sense of Scripture or the common received Sense of all true Christians are taught by the Light within without the external Revelation of the Scripture therefore according to W.P. the belief of none of these twelve Articles is necessary to our Salvation The which being the plain Import of W. P's Doctrine laid down in his Book whither it be not Plain Deism appearing with open face I appeal to all sincere Christians Section 2. His Arguments from Scripture that the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life Answered HE begins with his Proofs Page 4. That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the general Rule of Faith and Life from Matt. 11.27 and 1 Cor. 2.11 he argues That because the Father cannot be known but by the Revelation of the Son and Holy Spirit consequently that Light metioned John 1.3 or Spirit must have been the general Rule of Mens Knowledge Faith and Obedience with respect to God Answ His Consequence is denied he gives no proof of it yea it is manifestly false and to discover its Fallacy observe how he confounds the efficient Cause and Author of Knowledge and Faith with the Rule which he ought to distinguish He might as well argue no Man sees what hour it is on a Sun-dyal but by the Sun and consequently the Sun and not the Dyal is the Rule whereby he knows the hour Page 5. His next Argument is from Eph. 5.13 Whatever makes manifest is Light therefore the Light in the Conscience is the general Rule Answ The Consequence again is denied it has the same defect as the former as will appear by forming the like Argument Whatever makes manifest an outward object to our Eye is some outward light of Sun Moon or Candle c. Therefore that alone without the object manifests it and also without the Organ of sight who sees not the Fallacy of this Argument and as much he may see the Fallacy of the other The next place of Scripture he argueth from is Rom. 1.19 which he falsly quotes as I have observed he hath misquoted this place both here and in pag. 21 for thus he quotes it WHATEVER might be known of God was made manifest within for God who is Light hath shewn it unto them But let the place it self be considered and it saith not WHATEVER but what is to be known of God is manifest in them to wit the Gentiles or Heathen Nations who had not the peculiar Doctrines of the Christian Faith revealed to them or Preached among them And that the words what is to be known of God cannot be meant of WHATEVER can or is to be known of God was manifest in them as the Text doth not say it so it is a manifest Falshood It cannot be said of the best Christians â—hat whatever is to be known of God is made manifest in them for the best know but in part and there is still more to be known of God even in the best of Christians than what is at present revealed or made manifest in them And it is very evident from the following words what Paul meant by that saying What is to be known of God or as it is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. The Eternal power and God-Head which was made manifest partly by the things made or created without Men and partly by some Divine Illumination within them But doth it therefore follow that because those Heathens had some knowledge of the Eternal Power and God-head that therefore they knew all the fundamental Princiles of the Christian Religion By no means more than it followeth that W.P. knoweth some things of England and some other Countries partly by History and partly by his sight of them therefore he knows the whole Earth so far as it is habitable He brings another Proof That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life from Micah 6.8 He hath shewed unto thee O Man what is good and what God requireth of thee
Letter or Leaves of the Book since the Writing of the Scriptures are as it were the Repository or Ark where God's Law is preserved and to which a Recourse ought frequently to be made to read therein for daily Information and Instruction Yet the Doctrine is not so limited or confined to the Letter or Leaves of a Book but that the same Doctrine may be well and soundly preached and believed where the Book either hath not come or by Violence of Men has been taken away as it hath been reported that Persecutors have taken away the Bible from some Faithful Martyrs of Christ but though they took the Letter out of their hands they could not take the Word of God to wit the Doctrine and true Sense of it out of their Hearts And so far as I can remember it was never my Perswasion what W.P. here layeth down in his Book by way of Position that the Light in every Man's Conscience or the Dictates and Testimony of it abstractly considered from the peculiar Doctrines of Christianity are the Rule of Faith to Christian Men. If any shall find that or the like Doctrine in any of my Books on the first Intimation of it I declare I shall by God's help be ready to retract it and condemn it as most Erronious and as a Fundamental Error for it is plain Deism of which I have not the least remembrance that ever I was guilty as W.P. hath now plainly manifested his Deism in this Book I have under Examination Section I. The Definitions of General Rule and Faith given by W.P. not to be allowed because there is no such General Rule and Faith as he defineth BEfore he comes to hs Arguments he gives us his Definitions of General Rule and Faith By General Rule saith he we understand that constant Measure by which Men in all Ages have been enabled to judge of the Truth or Error of Doctrines and the Good or Evil of Thoughts Words or Actions Answ Here he undertakes to define a thing that by the Definition of it plainly demonstrates That it is not in being nor ever was in any Ages of the World ever since the Distinction betwixt God's Church and the World came to be I say ever since that Distinction all Mankind in all Respects Cases and Conditions never had one General Rule so his Definition is as if one should define a golden Mountain or something that never yet hath been since the Distinction above mentioned Possibly in Adam's Family for some time God only knoweth how long all Men belonging to it had one Rule universally but it is more than he can prove that this was only the Light in every of their Consciences by its common Discoveries for Adam himself had special Revelation whither by outward Vision and an outward Voice or only by internal Inspiration is not necessary at present to determine which taught him to expect Salvation by the promised Seed of the Woman and this Doctrine no doubt he preached to his Family That the Light or common discovery of the Light in every Man's Conscience may be called a General Rule of Moral Justice and Temperance called by Paul Rom. 1. 19. the Law writ in the Heart may and ought to he granted but this General Rule did not extend nor doth to be the Rule or a Rule of the Faith of Remission of Sin by the Blood of the promised Seed of the Woman the Lamb of God that was to be slain and should take away the Sin of the World And seeing the Light in every Conscience teacheth nothing of this Faith that in Scripture is called the Faith of God's Elect and the common Faith to wit of the Faithful in all Ages Therefore W.P. in the very entry of his Work maketh a great Stumble and useth a great Fallacy as if all Mankind ever since the Dispersion of the Nations to this day had one general Rule of Faith and Life and that was the Light in every Conscience abstractly consider'd from all External Helps and Means both of Knowledge and Faith Let W.P. tell us whether the Light by its common discovery in every Man's Conscience taught or gave the Command of Sacrificing If he say God or the Spirit that is God taught them to Sacrifice he shifts the Question which is not what God did teach by special Revelation but what he did teach Men generally in all Ages by common Illumination the Dictates of which are in great part generally the same to all Men in all Ages but so is not that either of Sacrifices or Circumcision or many other things that God commanded to some and not to others and to some in one Age and not in another such a general Rule of Morality or moral Justice has been is and ever will be in the World But what is this to the Rule of the Christian Faith which for Substance is the same with the Faith of all the Fathers Noah Abraham David c. It is easie to espy W. P's Design in this his Undertaking if he can prove that there is but one General Rule of Faith and Life to all Mankind the next step is by good Consequence that all Mankind ought to have but one Faith and one Religion and that is Deism and Paganism with a witness The one Faith that the Scripture mentioneth is not one Faith of all Mankind but one Faith of God's Church which is called the Faith of God's Elect when that Blessed Time shall come that the Gospel shall be outwardly preach'd to all Nations as our Saviour hath foretold it shall be it is justly hoped that there will be a General Rule of Faith and Life to all Mankind that then shall live but to talk of such a thing now and to define a thing which is not and write a Book about it is like T. More 's Vtopia Page 4. He is as Unsuccessful and Fallacious in his Definition of Faith By Faith saith he we understand an Assent of the Mind in such manner to the Discoveries made of God thereto as to resign up to God and have dependence upon him as the great Creator and Saviour of his People This Definition of Faith indeed suits well with the Definition of his General Rule of Faith But there are many parts of Mankind that have not only a Faith in God as the great Creator the Faith here only defined by him but have a Faith in Christ too and in God the Saviour and Redeemer considered as in the Person of a Mediator who is both God and Man by which Faith in Christ they have a most firm Faith in God grounded upon God's Promises which are all Yea and Amen in Christ And here in W. P's Definition of this Pagan and Deist Faith he supposes that which will not be granted to him viz. That any ever had such a Faith in God as to resign up to God and have dependence upon him as the great Creator and Saviour of his People without all Faith in Christ
c. Which saith he could not be without the Light of his Son shines in Man's Conscience therefore the light of Christ in the Conscience must needs have been the General Rule c. Answ His Consequence is again denied which he doth not prove it has the same defect with his foregoing proofs that he confounds the Author and Efficient cause of Faith with the Rule which is the instrumental Cause thereof But let it be further considered what the following words are not mentioned by W.P. here and let them be compared with the foregoing words Ver. 7. Will the Lord be pleased with Thousands of Rams or with ten Thousands of Rivers of Oyl shall I give my first born for my transgression the Fruit of my Body for the Sin of my Soul Ver. 8. He hath shewed thee O Man what is good and what doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly and love Mercy and walk humbly with thy God And it will appear that the words at least have a Comparative Sense as intimating that Justice Mercy and Humility or Humble walking with God are more acceptable to God and the greater things of God's Laws than all outward Sacrifices were But doth it therefore follow that God did not require those outward Sacrifices then to be offered up or that God did not require Faith in the People of Israel that he did Command them And if such a Faith was then required of them which the common dictates of the light in every Conscience did not teach them but special Revelation by the like reason it can be proved that the Faith of Christ the great Sacrifice as he was outwardly to be offered up of which all the outward Sacrifices were Types was also required by the Lord from that People the which Faith all the faithful then had and by which Faith they received the remission of their Sins according to Acts 10 43. But seeing the Light within every Man gives them not this Faith nor teacheth it them it evidently follows that the Light within every Man is not the Rule of the Christian Faith it may be further said that the words Micah 6.8 9. if they were to be understood with respect to meer Heathens and Gentiles who have not the External Word might imply that no more is required of them than those general things which the Law or Light in them doth teach them and is the only Rule they have but these words seem not to be spoke with respect to meer Gentiles but rather to them that were by Profession the Church of God and though neither Faith nor Repentance nor many other Evangelical Virtues and Duties are there expressed yet without doubt they are implyed as well as where Faith is only exprest in many places of Scripture Love and other Virtues are implyed And indeed by the like Fallacy W.P. might infer that our whole Religion consists in practiseing the Duties of the 2d Table from James's words Pure and undefiled Religion is to visit the Fatherless and the Widow and to keep unspotted from the World And that Consequently he that doth this though he practise none of the Duties of the First Table he has Religion enough yea though he have no Faith in God no fear of him nor Love to him if he be Charitable and temperate as it has been reported some Atheists have been Page 5. His next Argument is It was by this Law that Enoch Noah Abraham Melchisideck Abimilech Job Jethro c. walked and were accepted as saith Jreneus and Tertullian they wâ—re Just by the Law written in their Hearts then was it their Rule too and in that Just State Answ This Argument hath several defects in it 1. To argue from a Law or Rule of Moral Justice to a Law or Rule of Faith in Christ the promised Messiah without which Faith there is no promise of Eternal Life and Salvation in all the Scripture Secondly That he Jumbleth Abimelech and Jethro none of which were prophets with Abraham and others that were Prophets and had extraordinary Revelation concerning the Messiah Thirdly That he makes no distinction betwixt what the Light or Word did reveal commonly in all Men by the common Illumination and what that same word did reveal to the Prophets and by them to the Faithful by special Revelation and Illumination And indeed all his Arguments are in great part built on this Fallacy of not distinguishing but confounding the common or general Illuminations given to all Men from the special and extraordinary given to some That the common Illumination of the Divine Word was to the Patriarchs Abraham Noah c. a Law or Rule of Justice is granted but that it was to them a Law or Rule of Faith whereby they believed in the promised Messiah is denied for that was a special Revelation that was the Law or Rule of that Faith and not the common Illumination though both common and special were and are from the same Divine Word yet this hinders not their Distinction as all the Creatures of God have one Creator and Author of their Being yet this hinders not but that the Creatures are widely distinct one from another Section 3. His first and second Arguments that the Scripture is not the Rule of Faith and Life Answered Page 5. IN the next place he pleads that the Scriptures cannot be the Rule arguing thus Arg. 1. How can they be the general Rule that have not been general Answ He is still guilty of confounding and jumbling things that ought to be distinguished 1. None saith that the Scriptures are a general Rule If by a general Rule he means a Rule actually obliging all Men whomsoever for the Scripture obligeth none but such who either have them or at least can by some possible means have them 2. It is granted that the Law or Illumination that is in all Men is the general Law or Rule of Justice and Morality to all Men. But what then will it follow that Christians have no other Rule but that of moral Justice 3. He ought to have distinguished betwixt the general Law or Rule of Justice given to all Mankind and the general superadded Law and Rule of Christian Faith and Practise given in general to Christians but for want of this distinction he deceives himself and seeks to deceive others with fallacious Arguments Page 6. He brings an Objection thus But granting that the Light within were so viz. the general Rule before Scripture was extant yet c. Answ He supposeth that to be granted which ought not to be granted viz. That the common Illumination before Scripture was extant was the Rule of the Faith of all the Faithful who lived and died in the Faith of the promised Messiah by whom they believed to have Remission of Sin and eternal Life This is altogether denied for this Faith they had not by the common Illumination but by special Revelation given to some by Prophesie and to others by means of their Prophesies Page
to Eusebius's Sense Page 9. Arg. 5. He proceeds to a new Argument against the Scriptures being the Rule If the Scriptures were the general Rule they must have always been a perfect Rule ever since they were a Rule but this saith he is impossible since they were many hundred years in Writing and are now imperfect also as to number How then are they the perfect Rule And if imperfect saith he How can they be the Rule of Faith since the Rule of Faith must be perfect Answ This Argument surely is very imfect as well as offensive so openly to charge the holy Scriptures with imperfection Is the common discovery by the Light within given to all Mankind a perfect discovery of all things necessary given to all at once He grants It is not comparing the Light within to a School-master that first teacheth the Children to Spell before he teach them to Read Chr. Quak Page 18. what if all or much that was either spoke or writ by prophetical Inspiration was not at first extant this doth no more argue that the Scriptures are imperfect than that it argueth that because our blessed Lord from the dimensions of a Child increased to the dimensions of a Man that therefore he was imperfect when a Child whereas a Child and a Man have the same essential perfections And in like manner the Doctrine of the Christian Faith concerning the remission of Sin and Eternal Salvation by the promised Messiah was the same and had the same essential perfections from the beginning of the World and in all Ages as it has now And one Tenth part yea perhaps much less than one Hundred part of the Writings of the Holy Scriptures do perfectly contain all the essential parts of the Christian Doctrine which yet makes not the other parts superfluous I would fain know if God Almighty had given to W.P. but an Estate of one hundred a Year might not that without more have been a full enough provision for him doth it therefore follow that the other Hundreds he hath beside are superfluous Besides If not only the number of the Books of the Holy Scriptures is increased beyond what it was at first and for many Ages after but that divers very profitable Doctrines have been super-added to the fundamental and some new Commandments given by God Almighty to latter Ages that were not at first given Doth this argue any imperfection in the Commands of God But that new Commands were given to some in one Age that were not given to others in former Ages W.P. I think cannot deny yea that to Abraham the Commandment of Circumcision was given in the Ninety Ninth Year of his Age the Scripture Testimony is plain Doth it therefore follow that the Commands formerly given him or the Promises or his Faith before that time was lame and imperfect If adding new Commands by God himself to what was formerly given by him doth not make the body of God's Commandments imperfect nor doth adding to the Rule of Faith by Divine Authority make the Rule as first given imperfect Yea W.P. grants page 2. That though Men in all Ages had some knowledge of God yet not upon equal discovery And in his Christian Quaker page 18. Things are necessary in reference to their proper times that may be requisite to morrow which is not to day If then all Men have not the same discovery they have not the same general Rule Section 5. His sixth Argument taken from the Imperfection of the Scriptures Answered IT is greatly worth our noticeing after that W.P. hath argued against the Scriptures being the Rule because they were not all given at once but at sundry times whence he infers their Imperfections and consequently that they are not the Rule of Faith and Life Yet in Page 22 he makes the new Creature or new Creation to be the Rule and on the Margent quoting Gal. 6.16 As many as walk according to this Rule or in this Rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Phil. 3.16 he saith it must be understood Let us walk in the same Attainment and he saith The Rule mentioned Phil. 3.16 is spoken of the Measure of Attainment Pray consider how his Argument here for the new Creature and Measure of Attainment being the Rule of Faith and Life quite overthroweth his Argument against the Scriptures being the Rule because as he suggesteth they are imperfect they were not all given at once That one Age of Christianity should have one Rule and another Age another Rule he makes it very absurd p. 24. But is the Measure of Attainment the same in all Christians and in all Ages I suppose he will say nay then by his own Argument the lesser Attainment in some Ages and Persons is imperfect and therefore cannot be the Rule of Faith And will he say the new Creature has the same Stature in all Christians Or will or can he say That the new Creature is so perfect in him that nothing is to be added to it If nay then by his own Argument it is imperfect and therefore not the Rule And whereas he quotes Drusius on the Margent to prove from Gal. 5.6 that Faith that works by love is the Rule that is according to him Faith is its own Rule for the subject of his Discourse is What the Rule of Faith is which one time he makes to be Faith it self p. 22. another time Christ himself and the Spirit a third time neither this nor that but the Testimony of the Spirit Internal Revelation and Inspiration the eternal Precepts of the Spirit in Mens Consciences there repeated and declared p. 25. But again How can the new Creature be the General Rule seeing all Men have it not who have the Scriptures If because the Scriptures are not general they are not the Rule as W.P. argueth by the like reason the new Creature is not the Rule because not general and consequently by his way of reasoning all unregenerated Persons have no Rule at all But if unregenerated Persons have a Rule who have not the new Creature brought forth in them then by his own way of arguing against himself one part of Mankind to wit the Regenerated have one Rule which is the new Creature and the other part to wit the Unregenerated which is commonly the greater part have another but that according to him is absurd for then all have not one and the same general Rule which he contends they ought to have That there is a general Rule of Moral Honesty and Justice given to all Men the same which Paul calls The Law writ in the Hearts of the Gentiles is granted but that there is a general Law or Rule of Faith concerning Salvation by Christ Crucified is denied Section 6. Whither the new Creature mentioned Gal. 6.16 is the Rule of Faith And whither the Doctrine is the Rule to the new Creature or the new Creature the Rule to the Doctrine and which is the prior or principal Rule AS touching these
without them but only within them that is the Light in the Conscience and so there is no High-Priest without us nor no Heaven without us into which the Man Christ Jesus is gone nor King Christ without us but only within us for to say he is both without us and within us also will spoil W. P's Argument altogether and mar his Analogy betwixt the Law without under Moses and the Law within under Christ the High-Priest without then and the High-Priest within now If he grant there is a High-Priest without us and who is also King as well as Priest and that he is more without us than within us as all true Christians believe who have not the fulness within them but receive of his fulness and Grace for Grace and therefore that fulness is in the Man Christ without them he must also grant that the Law and Rule of Faith is as well without us as within us and so his Argument is spoiled but that he will be loth to grant for then the fundamental Principle of him and his Brethren is pluck'd up by the Roots by confessing to the Man Christ a High-Priest without us or King without us which will necessarily infer the Law and Rule of Faith delivered us by Christ without us is not within us only but without us also as Christ the Law-giver is Thus we see for Love of their supposed Rule of Faith only within them W.P. and his Brethren who approve his Book abandon and reject utterly any Christ High-Priest or King without them as also he has done in his Christian Quaker where he will have P. 97. The Lamb without in the Passover to shew forth the Lamb within to wit the Light in the Conscience but not the Lamb Christ without as he was outwardly slain And yet W.P. for all this hath said in his late answer to the Bishop of Cork That the Quakers differ little in Doctrine from the Church of England setting aside some School Terms And in his answer to the Bishop of Cork P. 97. he saith We i. e. he and his Brethren plainly and intirely believe the Truths contained in the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed But possibly some fallacy is latent here also as if he had said they believe the Truths Contained in the Jews Talmud or Turks Alcoran for doubtless there are some Truths contained in them both but many Falshoods and so he may think there are in that Creed for all his seeming fair Confession to it and I offer to prove they have disbelieved them all But how this consists with their having only their High Priest King and Prophet within them as they have the Law and Rule of their Faith only within them as W.P. here doth Argue I leave to the intelligent to Judge and whither this palpable contradiction bewrayes not their great disingenuity considering that they will not grant that they are in any one point changed in their Faith or Doctrine from what they were ever since they were a People but as God and Truth is the same so his People to wit the Quakers are the same as they have in so many express words lately Printed in the Book called the Quakers Cleared c. 3. As concerning the several places of Scripture quoted by him that he brings to prove the inward Teachings of God Christ and the Holy Spirit and God's writing his Laws in the Hearts of the Faithful all this is granted by all Sound Christians but that is not the true State of the Controversie betwixt the People called Quakers and their Opponents But the true State of the Controversie is this whither the inward Teachings of God of Christ and of the Holy Spirit come to believers without all outward means and without all outward Ministry and Service of Men or Books and whither the Law and Rule of Faith that Believers have in them put in them yea and writ in their Hearts by the Lord himself is without all outward Instruction and Teaching or Service of Men or Books or whither the Law and Rule of Faith and Practise within in respect of all the peculiar Doctrines and Precepts of the Christian Religion be not so to speak a Transcript or Copy from the Law and Rule of Faith without us as delivered in the Holy Scriptures which therefore may be called the Original as to us though that Original Law and Rule without us came from an inward Original in the Holy Prophets and in the Man Christ and his Holy Evangelists and Apostles which yet had a higher Original to wit the Archetypal Law as it was in God before the Copy or Transcript of it came to be in the Prophets and from them committed to writing outwardly and from that outward writing transferred and transcribed into the Hearts of the Faithful where it becomes an inward Law or Rule in them And thus the Faithful have the Law and Rule of Faith both without them and within them first without them in the Holy Scriptures next within them put in them by the Lord in their Hearts by means of outward Instruction as Preaching Reading c. And if the Question be asked Whither is best to have it without them or within them I answer to have it both ways is very necessary for in God's ordinary way of working we cannot have it within us if we had it not first without us no more than we can have Food within us if we had it not first without us for as our outward and bodily Food that nourisheth our Bodies comes into our Bodies from without us by the Door so to speak of our Mouth so the wholsome Doctrine of eternal Salvation by Christ our Blessed Saviour and Redeemer by means of which our Souls and inward Man are nourished being accompanied with the Divine Influences of the Grace and Spirit of God and of Christ comes into our Souls by the Door of our outward Hearing and Reading in the Holy Scriptures Again though there be ever so good Food and ever so Plentiful without us yet if we receive it not within us it neither doth nor can nourish us And as the clean Beasts under the Law did chew the Cud of what they did eat for their Nourishment so the Faithful what they outwardly hear and read of God's Word in the Holy Scriptures must meditate upon inwardly for their Spiritual Food Thus the great necessity of having the Law and Word of God both without us and within us the Rule of our Faith and Life is evidently apparent so long as we live in these mortal Bodies And therefore God hath appointed and Christ hath given an outward Ministry together with his other Gifts and Graces to his Church to continue to the end of the World and to his last coming But again if it be asked Is there not an Internal word Voice or Teaching of Christ distinct from the outward word Voice and Teaching that outwardly soundeth in our outward Ears I answer There is but in God's
ordinary way it works in the Faithful accompanying the outward word and by means thereof the which inward word Voice and Teaching properly and strictly speaking is not any singular new or differing Form of words but rather a Divine Power Light and Life quickning enlightning and strengthning the Understanding and Heart of Man Spiritually and Savingly to understand the Divine Doctrines and Mysteries of the Christian Faith outwardly delivered in the Holy Scriptures and not only so but giving the Souls of the Faithful at times a Divine Sense Sight and Taste of God's Divine Power Love and Life called in Scripture A tasting of the heavenly Gift and of the good Word of God and of the powers of the World to come which Sight Sense and Taste and Spiritual Feeling is indeed beyond all that can be either uttered with the Mouth heard with the Ear or conceived in the Mind in or by any Form of words as the outward Sight Sense Taste and Feeling of outward delightful Objects is beyond all words and report of them as the Scripture saith Eye hath not seen nor Ear heard nor hath it entred into the Heart to conceive the good things that God hath prepared for them that love him But as saith the Apostle Paul God hath revealed them to us to wit to the Faithful by his Spirit 1 Cor. 2.9 10. Isaiah 64.4 viz. in an earnest and first Fruits the Harvest and full Fruition being reserved for the future State And here again if it be asked what is the Rule whereby to know surely the true Divine Enjoyment as above described from the false and counterfeit that may be nothing other than Satan's Transformings I answer It is improper in this Case to ask what is the Rule of Faith or Practise because this high Divine Enjoyment is properly speaking neither an Act of Faith nor Practise though it is a proper Consequent and Concomitant of sound Faith and godly and virtuous Practise for as in the exercise of the outward Sight Hearing and Taste no Form of words can be a Rule to a Man to teach him how to See Hear or Taste but the sound Disposition of the Organs of those Senses and the due Application of the Objects is all that is requisite to enable a Man to know what he certainly Sees Hears and Tasts so when the Spiritual Senses of the Soul are awakened by the quickning Power of God and the Mind fitly and duly disposed whatever Divine and Spiritual Objects are presented to that Soul and Mind it naturally and necessarily apprehends them by its Spiritual Senses which are as it were the Spiritual Organs of the Inward and Spiritual Man the best and fittest Disposition of the Soul and Mind making it capable for such Divine Enjoyment is Internal Purity of Heart as our Saviour hath taught us saying Blessed are the pure in Heart for they shall see God that is always accompanied with a sound Faith grounded upon the sound and wholsome Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures And though no Form of words can be a Rule a Priori whereby to discern true Enjoyments from false and counterfeit yet a Posteriori that is by the Consequents and Effects they may soon and quickly be discerned if duly examined by the infallible Rule of Faith and Life laid down in the Scriptures even as a Posteriori or consequentially a Man may know whither what he apprehends he seeth heareth or tasteth outwardly be real or imaginary Section 14. Diverse places of Scripture explained and rescued from his Corrupt Glosses and Interpretations BUT before I finish my Answer to this his last Argument I think fit to take notice how he has perverted misconstrued and misapplied all and every one of the places of Scripture above recited out of his Page 21 to prove that the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life to every Man and that without any necessary super-addition without or within Men be they Jews Mahometans Infidels Christians they have all but one and the same Rule of Faith and Life as they have one and the same Creator For indeed not one of these places are to be understood as with respect to that part of Mankind that lived or now live in pure Heathenism or Gentilism but such as were or are professed Members of God's Church as the Jews were when our Saviour was bodily present on Earth and as the Christians were and now are excepting that one place Rom. 1.19 which as I have above noted he falsly quotes rendring it Whatsoever may be known of God which as the English Translation doth not so word nor doth the Greek bear it and the Falseness of it I have above described as for the saying of our Saviour My Kingdom is not of this World which is the first of those Quotations above given Can it be supposed that by his Kingdom there he meant nothing but the Light in every Man's Conscience he offers not the least proof of it the Kingdom of God and of Christ in Scripture otherwise called the Kingdom of Heaven hath diverse significations sometimes it signifies his Church that is called a Kingdom of Priests sometimes his Rule and Government in and over his Church by his Laws and Precepts and Power of his Spirit and manifold Gifts and Graces and sometimes the Gospel with the Blessings thereof that is the Doctrine of the Gospel as where Christ said to the Jews The Kingdom should be taken from them Matt. 21.43 as hath been accordingly fulfilled though still they have the common Illumination of the Light within them and sometimes it signifieth his Kingdom of Glory in the future State after Death This next Quotation is out of Luke 17.20 21. The Kingdom of God is within you which also he falsly quotes leaving out the word you so making it universal to serve his Design for a Proof that the Light in every Mans Conscience is that which is meant by Christ in this place the Kingdom of God I grant God has an universal providential Kingdom in and over all his Creatures and more particularly in and over all Mankind according to Psal 103.19 and his Kingdom ruleth over all or in all and that his providential Kingdom among Men is administred in great part by means of the common Illumination in and over all Men but the Kingdom as it is here understood Luke 17.20 21. is not his providential Kingdom but a new Administration of the Gospel that many were looking for and expecting which made the Pharisees ask when the Kingdom of God should come surely as they meant not to ask when his providential Kingdom should come or when should Men begin to have something to reprove or convince them for common Sins in their Conscience nor did Christ mean it so but of some more excellent Dispensation by his Doctrine and Preaching which the Pharisees had heard as well as others and therefore it might well be said to be not only among them as some translate it but
them speak that God was manifested extraordinarily in the Flesh that he gave his Life for the World that such as believe and obey his Grace in their Hearts receive Remission of Sins and Life everlasting First It is needful he should explain what he means by these words That he gave his Life whither the Life of the Man Christ without us or the Blood which is the Life and that Life is the Light within as he hath been heard to preach and is according to his Books And what means he by the word believe Whither to believe that Christ died for our Sins and rose again Well in Charity I will suppose this to be his meaning otherwise he would greatly equivocate but still all this belief is none of the absolute Necessaries in Religion they are some considerable Matters superadded Superadded to what To the Scriptures Nay they are the chief Doctrines of the Scriptures Therefore again I ask Superadded to what Why to the Light within its Dictates But are they necessary to be believed since they are supernumerary and superadded to the Dictates of the Light in every Conscience Yea saith W.P. Page 35. where the History has reached and the Spirit of God has made a Conviction upon the Conscience Well then If they are necessary to be believed where the Spirit of God hath made this Conviction upon the Conscience this Conviction is not the Effect of the general Light in every Conscience but somewhat superadded and therefore the general Light in the Conscience is not the perfect and compleat Rule But what if the Spirit make not this Conviction upon the Conscience of some who have the Scripture which he calls the History Is he sure the Spirit will make it or doth make it on every Conscience to whom the History reacheth If he say yea he throweth down his Fabrick with his own words for if so this Conviction made by the Spirit of God on the Conscience must be a part yea the greatest part of the Rule of Faith to all who have the Scriptures because the Scriptures hold forth many more things to be believed and practised than these few eternal Precepts as he calls them of the Spirit in the Conscience And though W.P. here seems to render them excusable to whom the Doctrine of Christ's Death hath reached and yet believe it not on whom the Spirit of God hath not made a Conviction Yet in his Treatise of Spiritual Liberty he calls it a loose Plea to pretend want of Conviction for not obeying G. F's Orders and tending to Ranterism But if he shall say the Spirit doth not work this Conviction upon many that the History reacheth as his words import then they are left at liberty whither to believe them at all without all Sin or danger Thus we may see what sort of Faith he and his Brethren have of the Articles of the Creed viz. An unnecessary Faith to have it or not have it is all a Case if they have it not it is not their Sin their primary Rule the Light within them tells them nothing of it But then why should the Secondary Rule tell them any of these things As there is nothing in the Copy but what is in the Original so there is nothing in the Secondary Rule the Scriptures at this rate but what is in the Dictates of the Light within and therefore all that is to be found in the Scripture that is not in the Dictates of the Light within is not so much as the Secondary Rule Thus we may see of what little value the Scriptures are and must be with him and his Party by this his way of arguing and answering Objections But note Reader how in his foregoing words I have faithfully quoted he makes the believing and obeying God's Grace for Remission of Sins and Life everlasting to be none of the absolute Necessaries of Religion but superadded as some of them speak Here is Obedience to God's Grace made as unnecessary by W.P. as Faith in Christ as he was outwardly manifest in the Flesh What thinks G.W. and his Brethren of this Doctrine Is it not plain Antinomianism yea plain Ranterism Section 16. The Scriptures are not certainly known and believed upon the Foundation of W.P. and his Party among the Quakers but are upon the Foundation of all Orthodox Christians The Question wrongly stated by W.P. about the Sufficiency of the Light or Spirit of God within which is not what he can reveal but what he doth reveal without the outward Means of Instruction Page 23. HE labours to turn off that Objection against him of his arguing from the uncertainty of the Scriptures that they cannot be a Rule of Faith and Life by answering The Scriptures are uncertain upon their Foundation but not upon ours We would have them received saith he upon the Spirits Testimony and Evidence which gave them forth I answer And so would all true Christians but the difference is great in the way and manner of their and his defining this Testimony or Evidence which he and his Brethren will have wholly to be by Prophetical and Apostolical Inspiration the same in Specie and Kind with what the Prophets and Apostles had giving them a new repetition of the same Articles and Precepts and all this only from the Light within as it is a common dispensation to all Mankind the falsity of which common experience as well as the Testimony of Scripture doth sufficiently prove for if the Light within them doth de novo give W.P. and his Brethren the Revelation of all or most of these peculiar Doctrines of Christianity why should they have it more than Jews Mahometans Deists and Heathens many of whom they account have been and are faithful and obedient to the Dictates of the Light within them Besides if more be revealed to the Quakers by the common Light within than to other parts of Mankind who have not the Scriptures they must needs grant their Rule of Faith is more large and full than that in others and consequently not being so perfect in others as in them it is no general Rule of Faith for thus he argued against the Scriptures But if the Scriptures are so wholly uncertain upon the foundation of other Christians and so certain upon the foundation of the Quakers from their pretence to the same divine Inspiration that the Prophets and Apostles had they would wonderfully oblige the Christian World If we could believe them to tell us from their infallibility what Translations are best or rather to give us a new Translation by divine Inspiration and which of all the Copies and various Iections are truest but that this is a groundless and empty brag is too apparent while their ignorance and gross perversions of Scripture and false Interpretations are greater than any other in Christendom as can easily be proved But in contradiction to all this that the Scriptures are certain upon the Quakers foundation from the divine Inspiration and Revelation that
the Spirit has given them of their Truth much or indeed most of all this is again denyed by W.P. telling us in answer to that Objection Page 32. This Light you speak of could not tell you which way Sin came into the World that there was an Adam and Eve that they fell after that manner and that Sin so entred the World that Christ was born of a Virgin suffered Death and rose again c. He roundly answereth that inasmuch as an account of those things hath been already revealed and is extant therefore any new Revelation of such things is not needed I answer How not needed and yet certain to you upon the Spirits inward Evidence and Testimony and to none but you and such as you who pretend to the same Revelations with the Prophets and Apostles However seeing he grants he and his Brethren have no Revelation from the Light within them That Christ was born of a Virgin suffered Death and rose again therefore he must needs confess all these things concerning Christs Birth Death Resurrection are uncertain to them and so no matters of their Faith And then seeing other Christians believe these things upon an inward Evidence and Testimony of the Spirit though not by the same Revelation in Kind or Specie with that of the Prophets and Apostles yet by way of Seal to the truth of them as above explained the proper consequence of which is this that all these great things recorded in Scripture concerning Christ's birth of a Virgin his having dyed for our Sins his Resurrection Ascension and Intercession for us in Heaven are altogether uncertain upon the Quakers foundation because as W.P. confesseth not inwardly revealed to them which yet are certain upon the foundation of all true Christians to wit the inward Testimony and Evidence of the Spirit by way of sealing to the Truth of them as by an objective medium as above explained But why are not these things concerning Christ's Birth Death revealed to the Quakers by W. P's confession Why because they are not necessary to be believed they are none of the Eternal Precepts of the Spirit in the Consciences of all Men Teaching some few things of owning a great God Almighty and some few moral Principles of Temperance and Justice as doing as we would be done by this is the Quakers Evangelium Eternum their everlasting Gospel whatever is more is unnecessary and Superfluous Page 32. He saith To say the Light or Spirit could not do it viz. reveal that Christ was born of a Virgin suffered Death and rose again c. is blasphemous as well as absurd Answ I know none that saith the Spirit or God and Christ considered as the Light could not do it but that 's not the Question what the Spirit could do or what the Light within taking it in the highest Sense as to signifie the divine Word could or can do but the proper state of the question is whither the Spirit or Light within hath given generally any such Revelation of these things which if he hath not given and that to all Men then to be sure even by W. P's confession such Revelation is no part of the Rule of Faith for it is not what God who is Light or the Spirit can reveal but what he hath revealed that is the Rule of Faith and doth ordinarily reveal And seeing the Quakers as W.P. hath granted have no inward Revelation of these things viz. That Christ was born of a Virgin c. It is no part of their Faith or Creed for the Rule of their Faith hath not taught it them If any have said the Light within every man cannot reveal these things they do not mean by the Light within either Christ or the Spirit but that common Illumination that is in all Men that is neither Christ nor the Spirit but yet is a gift of Christ and of the Spirit Section 17. His Proofs out of the Fathers and Primitive Protestants for the Spirits being the Rule of Faith all Fallacious An Instance of Calvin quoted by him in some Passage of his Institutions expresly to the contrary Whither the Esseni Pythagoras Clinias and the Scythians before our Saviour's Incarnation thought Swearing unlawful from the Light within AS for these many Authors some Fathers and other late Protestant Authors that he quotes in confirmation of his Assertion viz. That the Scripture is not the Rule of Faith and Life but the Light in every Conscience none of all these quotations which I have diligently read and considered say any such thing viz. That the Scriptures are not the Rule of Faith and Life or that the Light in every Conscience is that Rule Either he is very ignorant and unacquainted in Calvin and Beza's wriings and other Protestants or very unfair to quote them when he cannot but know in his Conscience if he be acquainted with them that all those Protestant Authors did Zeolously contend that the Scripture was the Rule of Faith and Life and though they did Zealously assert the necessity of the Spirits Internal Evidence and Testimony to Seal to the Truth of the Scripture and give the understanding of it yet none of them all that he has quoted say or hold that the Spirit or Light in every Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life I rememno such Doctrine taught by them and yet I suppose I know their Doctrine as well as he and were it needful I could produce sufficient Testimonies from their Books that he has manifestly wronged them but he who takes so great liberty to wrest the Scriptures no wonder if he make bold to do the same with these Mens Writings His Quotation out of Calvin is this Inst Lib. 1. Cap. 8. It is necessary the same Spirit that spake by the mouth of the Prophets should pierce into our Hearts to perswade us that they faithfully delivered that which was committed to them of God This doth not prove that Calvin denyed the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith having expresly taught that they were But to shew how little acquainted W.P. is with Calvin's Doctrine in this point whom he hath quoted for him to prove that the Scripture or written word is not the Rule of Faith but the Light in every Conscience or the Spirit abstractly considered from the written word or how unfair and fallacious in so doing if acquainted with his writings I shall give some passages out of his Institutions That is in English For when the mind of Man for its weakness could by no way come to God unless helped and assisted by his Holy Word it was necessary that all Men the Jews excepted did walk in vanity and error because they sought God without the Word Thus we see according to Calvin how necessary was the Word of God to wit the Doctrine outwardly delivered of God to Men by the Holy Prophets to bring them to God out of error and vanity for by the Holy Word it is manifest Calvin meant not the
the Light in every Conscience as W.P. saith here in this Book or some New Revelation or discovery that neither Jews nor Turks nor other Deists have nor all Christendom but only and alone the People called Quakers But if these new Revelations be their Rule in the Case it quite overturns W. P's Fabrick of setting up a general Rule of Faith and Life in every Man's Conscience For a new Revelation that only one part of Mankind hath cannot be a general Rule W.P. makes not the Light within which he will have to be the Spirit or God himself or Christ in every Man abstractly considered from the inward discoveries Dictates and Precepts there delivered to be the general Rule which he calls the Eternal Precepts of the Spirit in the Conscience and the Noble precepts writ in Man's Heart Phrases that he has borrowed from some Heathen writers as Pythagoras and Sophocles and which are to be owned in their place to be such and to be a general Rule of Moral Justice and Temperance as is above owned but not either the general Rule of the Christian Religion with respect to its peculiar Doctrines and Precepts nor indeed so much as any Rule at all in that state nor indeed is it at all proper to call the Spirit the Rule in his Sense but rather the Dictates and discoveries of the Spirit which W.P. calls sometimes Revelation to wit Internal and the Internal Testimony of the Spirit Eternal Precepts and noble Laws writ in all Men's Hearts for the Spirit abstractly considered from all Internal and External discovery Revelation and Testimony teacheth Men nothing at all and therefore can be no Rule to them as such And seeing W.P. hath cast away the Holy Scriptures from being the Rule of Faith and Practise even to us Christians that is all and every one of the peculiar Doctrines and Precepts of Christianity that are to be sure no part of those Eternal Precepts and Laws writ in all Mens Consciences not one of them nor all of those peculiar Doctrines and Precepts are so much as a part of the Christians Rule of Faith and Life for if it were then the Christians the Deists the Mahometans and Infidel Jews should not have one general Rule of Faith and Life which he contends for Page 41. He proposeth an Objection and pretends to solve it Obj. But is not the Scripture the Judge of Controversie He should rather have made the Objection run thus Is not the Scripture the Rule whereby the Spirit of Truth who is properly the Judge doth by his inward ordinary illumination in the Faithful determine the Controversie in all the necessary things of Salvation Yea and also in many other things though not absolutely necessary yet very profitable He Answers How can that be since the Question most times arises about the meaning of Scripture I reply yet still the Scripture is the proper Rule to determine the Controversie even when the question ariseth about the meaning of the Scripture because what seemeth obscure in some places of Scripture are opened and made plain by other plain places of Scripture treating on the same Subject that are as a Key to open them with out any other Rule than the Scripture it self only there is need of the Spirits Internal Illumination and assistance to help us to use that Key especially in reference to the saving knowledge of them He proceeds in his answer to the Objection saying Is there any place to wit in Scripture tells us without Interpretation whither the Socinian or Trinitarian be in the right in their differing Apprehensions of the Three that bear record c. Also the Homousian and Arian about Christ's Divinity or the Papists or Protestants about Transubstantiation If then things are left undefin'd and undetermined I mean literally and expresly in the Scripture and that the Question arises about the Sense of words Doth the Scripture determine which of these Interpreters hit the mark From all which he concludes that not the Scripture but the Interpretation must decide the Matter in Controversie and that Interpretation must be given from the Spirit of God to be a true and infallible Interpretation Answ Seeing that Interpretation according to W.P. cannot be given from the Spirit without an extraordinary Revelation the things in Controversie being such according to W. P's Phrase and Confession P. 31. as fall not within the ordinary Discoveries that are absolutely necessary to Man's Salvation and that W.P. also grants that he and his Brethren have no such extraordinary Revelation for it is not needful being none of the absolute Necessaries to our Salvation P. 33. It evidently follows that neither W.P. nor any of his Brethren nor indeed any other Men now living whatsoever have any certainty whither the Socinian or Trinitarian be in the right that is whither Christ is God and whither Christ had any Existence before Mary and whither Christ be in any of the Faithful yea or nay yea W.P. hath no certainty of this Fundamental Principle that Christ is in him or in any of his Brethren the great reason of their Assertion that Christ is in them being that Christ is God so that if it be not certain from Scripture that Christ is God and if the Socinian Doctrine should prove true that Christ is only a Man it will evidently follow as I think W.P. will grant that it is utterly false that Christ is in any Men whatsoever and that that Light that is in Men even the most Faithful is not Christ for how can that which is only a meer Man and a meer Creature as the Socinians say that Christ only is be in all Men. Again If it cannot be determined from Scripture without extraordinary Revelation which W.P. grants neither he nor his Brethren have as touching these Matters whither the Arians or the Homonsians be in the right it evidently followeth that neither W.P. nor his Brethren are certain whither the word mentioned John 1.1 be any other than a meer Creature and consequently they are not certain but that they themselves are Idolaters who give any Divine Worship to Christ as he is that Word Also if it be not certain from Scripture whither the Papists or Protestants be in the right about Transubstantiation without extraordinary Revelation according to W. P's way of arguing If the Papists should happen to be in the right and W.P. by his Confession knoweth nothing to the contrary but that they are he and his Brethren should be guilty of horrid Contempt and Blasphemy to call that which is the Body of Christ nothing but Bread And is not this Assertion of W.P. a fair Inlet to Popery that the Scripture doth not determine expresly without Interpretation and that Interpretation cannot be had without new Revelation whither the Papists Doctrine of Transubstantiation be true So that to him at present it is a Matter of Indifferency and if W.P. should turn Papist or suppose him to be one when he declares himself he