not consider what they were rather than from whom they came To these questions they will then be as speechless as he in the Gospel that was found without his Wedding Garment And it will not be Thomas Ellwood that will then be able to open their mouths Par. You have said enough to convince me both of the weakness and naughtiness of this Plea which he has taught the people and by which they encourage themselves to sleight their Teachers and their Doctrine for the least failing they find in them Min. This will neither justify the impiety of these men nor the Separation of such as have already left the Church on that pretence of the Teacher's not following his own directions which is as absurd and preposterous saith St. Augustin As if a Traveller should think he must go back again or leave the way because he saw the Mil-stone with its inscription shewing him the way but not moving in it at all it self But there are too many that rejoyce at the faults of Ministers where they find them and invent and impute them where they find them not that they may have a pretence for their Separation To which purpose rightly saith St. Augustin in the same place Men seek not so much with Charity whom they may Commend in order to their Imitation as with ill will whom they may Carp at in order to their own Deception Some cannot find out Good men being ill themselves and others fear to find such because they would still be evil Par. The true Ministers were always Examples of Goodness he says but too many of these Ministers are Examples of evil p. 24 Min. Has not the Quaker forgot himself here For too many is an implicit acknowledgment that many are not Examples of evil and therefore after all his Exclamations may be Good men Par. When you cannot clear them of your own Profession says he you fall upon the Quakers whom if you can render as bad as your own you think you have done something c. p. 24 25. Min. I never endeavour'd to clear those of mine own Profession that are faulty but the Innocent and to justify the Profession it self from unjust Cavils I ever thought it a method as Ungentile as Improper to defend Truth by Personal Reflections A Zealous Turk and a prophane Christian makes me think no better of Mahometanism nor worse of Christianity But seeing the Quakers themselves have been the first Aggressors in this way of arguing and do place so much of their strength therein it was proper for me only in general terms not naming any particular persons and indeed I was engaged to confnte it by letting them see how much it reflects upon their own Faction and makes all such objections void However that the world may know it was no groundless intimation of mine being thus put upon 't I desire Sir Iames Whitlock's case as it was lately managed in Chancery and two Books the one call'd The Quakers Spritual Court the other The Spirit of the Hat written by a Quaker may be examined By this time I hope I have removed your scruples occasion'd by the Quaker's first Chapter which in his Preface he tells his Reader is Offensive As great a truth as ever he spake For I have sufficiently proved it so to be that is offensive to God to Truth and all Good men But let us now proceed to the examination of his second Chapter CHAP. II. Of saying You to a single person Par. IN his second Chapter T. E. says you seem offended with their using the wrd Thou to a single person Min. I only vindicate the use of You to a single person yet must I tell him that to take up a word or phrase tho' lawful in it self in contradiction to an innocent custom and in an affected singularity as a mark of distinction from their Neighbours this is justly offensive And to make it a necessary duty to say Thou to a single person and a sin to say You when God has neither commanded the one nor forbidden the other this is adding to the Word of God and is rank Superstition and Pharisaism in enslaving the Conscience and placing Religion in pitifull niceties Superstition being an impiety which represents God so light or so froward as to be either pleased or angry with things indifferent and of no moment Par. But T. E. says that they lay not the stress of their Religion upon words p. 27. Min. A good hearing Then may a good man without any violence to Religion say as well You as Thou to a single person But if he spoke as he thought why do they and he contend so much about a word and divide the Church and separate themselves from it for a thing they dare lay no stress of Religion upon So that he has in those words done little credit to his Cause and his whole Party in making them all Schismaticks Yet can we think that he has here truly represented his own Party or clear'd them of Superstition while we observe their strict and demure use of words and phrases to the enslaving of their own Consciences As if to say I thank you for your kindness or the like were not as good sense and as lawful as to say I receive thy love Or to say Such a one is dead were not as pleasing to God as to say He is out of the body Or to say I cannot consent to such a thing were not as proper and as Religious as to say I am not free which is a phrase they have very ready to oppose good Laws and good Counsel And if you mark the Quakers you cannot but observe that in the affected use of their distinguishing phrases tones and gestures they really esteem themselves more religious than their Neighbours whilst indeed if they understood it they are the less Religious by how they are the more superstitious and schismatical But I believe that in many of them much of this proceeds from want of knowledge who now I hope will by one of their own Teachers be at length convinc'd of their great errour in laying so much stress of Religion upon words and phrases Par. You must be cautious how you reflect upon the Quakers for the use of their phrases seeing many of them are taken out of the holy Scriptures Min. Though the holy Scriptures ought to be remembred and frequently used in our Converse for our mutual instruction Yet I would not have you so ignorant and superstitious as to think that God in revealing his will there design'd that our duty should consist in the continual use of those very forms of speech but in a due regard to those truths and Commands contained in them As for the style of the Scriptures you are to understand that it was ever accommodated to the particular dialect of that people to whom they were written and therefore varied accordingly as we find it does in the different proprieties of the Hebrew Tongue in
Dominium Nobilium whereby they have jus praecedentiae a right of precedency and Locus potior decernendi and other things of like nature Therefore they have Ornaments allotted to them which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Titles to adorn them whih are no other than certain marks of their civil valuation For it is past dispute that as some Men are of much more value to the publick than others viz. Able Commanders Iudges c. So publick Governors have power to determine the rates both of Men and Things and to signifie the value they set upon one Man above another by giving him a higher place and a title Ninthly These priviledges being propagated to posterity and made hereditary for Patrum conditionem liberi sequuntur as the Law speaks make different Families in respect of superiority and inferiority These advancements descending to their Children being encouragements to civil vertues and great actions And 't is hard to conceive how these things can be otherwise in this World without danger to that order which is necessary to the subsistence of each civil Society These things and the like must necessarily distinguish persons into several ranks and classes as Servius Tullius distributed the Roman Citizens and this the Scripture freely acknowledges for we read also of Nobles Exod. 24. 11. Ier. 27. 20. and the Sons of Nobles Eccl. 10. 17. The Title of Honourable Isa. 3. 3 5. Mar. 15. 43. Acts 13. 50. and 17. 12. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which the Scriptures express men of worth was used by the Greeks as a Title to salute a Gentleman For seeing there are different ranks of Men downwards from the King to the Peasant therefore as you see it is agreeable to holy Scripture so all sober men will acknowledge it is agreeable to Reason also to give to each rank such distinct Titles as are proper to express that difference And with what reverence and outward civil respects the Primitive Christians behaved themselves to their Governors may be seen in Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. And what is any where said that true piety is the Fountain of Honour or the like is meant in a Religious sense and concerns the inward man and is not at all intended to exclude those civil distinctions among men in reference to their outward capacities To suppose otherwise were very ridiculous Par. The case is still clearer to me and you have made T. E's way of reasoning appear sufficiently absur'd Min. I shall make it more apparent before I have done by giving you a List both of his Absurdities and Self-contradictions contained in this one Paragraph we are now upon First Absurdity in implying that Christ's death put an end to his Moral documents this of Luk. 14. 10. being one 2 Absur that all Political Government is now at an end and God's People must be now no more an outward National people 3 Absur In making the use of the Sword unlawful now in the time of Reformation in contradiction to Rom. 13. 4. where 't is said that the Magistrate bears not the Sword in vain hereby condemning two good Centurions him in Mat. 8. 9 10. and Cornelius Acts 10. 1 2. who was after Christ's death By this Rule neither forreign invasions nor intestine Rebellions must be opposed nor prevented by any outward means But we have no reason to trust the Quaker here seeing divers of his Brethren bore Arms and Offices in the late Army yet at the same time professed Quakerism and I can name the persons were there occasion for it 4 Absur In going about to prove outward things connived at by Christ and indulged to the Jews for the hardness of their hearts by that very Text in Mat. 19. 8. which is an express and plain instance of his forbidding and reforming those arbitrary divorces which Moses suffer'd 5 Absur in saying in such general terms that the State of the Church in Christ's time was Outward and Worship Outward and in that notion afterwards to vanish as if after Christ's death the Church were not to retain any Outward State or Outward Worship And consequently that all vocal Prayers all gestures of Devotion all Outward Ordinances yea the very notion and being of the visible Church must vanish together 6 Absur in making no difference at all between the State of the Church under Christ's time and under Moses's contrary to these Scriptures Heb. 1. 1. and 2. 1 2 3. and 3. 1 7. making the Doctrine of Christ no Gospel Ellwood's self-contradictions in this passage are these 1 Contrad His putting Outward Respects among those things which he says were indulged by our Saviour to continue till the Reformation and yet venturing to contradict himself in the exposition he gives of Mat. 23. 10. wherein he affirms that civil titles are there forbidden 2 Contrad His saying Outward honour went off after the death of Christ in contradiction to his own acknowledgment of the Epithet as he will have it of Most Noble given by St. Paul to Festus who being a Heathen had no Christian vertue to qualifie him for it according to the Quakers principles 3 Contrad His putting Outward respects among other things that were to cease at the time of Reformation in contradiction to what himself had implicitly yielded concerning the lawfulness of salutation p. 32. which is an outward civil respect Par. But T. E. has another distinction and bids his Readers consider to whom this in Luk. 14. 10. was spoken They were Pharisees of whom T. E. says there were several ranks and degrees there were chief Pharisees and inferiour Pharisees and they took place one of another c. Nay there were seven ranks among them as Goodwin tells us c. p. 40. Min. The Quaker is out again Where did he ever read of inferiour Pharisees Indeed in ver 1. it 's said one of the chief Pharisees but in the Greek 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifies one of the Sanhedrim as appears from Luk. 24. 20. Io. 3. 1. Acts 3. 17. For though Goodwin tells him that there were seven ranks among the Pharisees he do's not tell him that they took place of one another by virtue of higher or lower ranks for there was no such matter one Rank looking on themselves to be as good as another Hence the learned Scultetus saith Pharisaeorum septem non classes aut ordines sed genera fuisse liquet And we may note by the way that they who go about to explain Scripture upon pretence of their having the Spirit do if they want the ordinary means viz. Learning sanctified by the Spirit soon baffle themselves and demonstrate they have no true Spirit in them Par. But what was that to his Disciples says he He puts them in mind of their Equality p. 41. Min. Was there ever so gross an absurdity As if the Saviour of the World who came to Disciple all mankind should allow that to one sort of Men and prohibit the same thing
Is it an untruth to profess a Duty Are we not commanded to be subject to one another 1 Pet. 5. 5. In honour preferring one another Rom. 12. 10. And that each esteem other better than himself Phil. 2. 3 Par. But T. E. thinks many do not intend to do any service for those they call Masters and so 't is flattery Min. Let the flattery be laid aside not the innocent phrase which expresses a Christian duty viz. That we be ready to serve one another in all Offices of Civility By Love saith the Apostle serve one another which a Superiour may do to an Inferiour Par. But Titles says he without relation we disown and reject as being indeed Titles of flattery which we dare no more make use of than that good man who said of old Job 31. 21 22. Let me not I pray you accept any mans person neither let me give flattering Titles unto man p. 44. Min. I suppose he brings not this quotation out of the Old Testament to disprove all Titles because he acknowledges that they were then allowed and used outward honour having not then passed off And it 's evident the good man in Iob 31. speaks not against all but flattering Titles only Par. You told me that St. Luke dedicating his Gospel to Theophilus salutes him with the Title of Most Excellent And though Festus was a Heathen yet St. Paul addresses himself to him with the Title of Most Noble These says T. E. are not Titles but Epithets p. 45. Min. They are Epithets of Honour and what are those but Titles A Term of Honour is a Title in what part of speech soever it is exprest What do's the Quaker think of Right Worshipful and Right Honourable Do's not every body know these to be Titles and yet these are as much Epithets as this of Most Noble or Most Excellent And then what has this wise Quaker gotten by this subtle distinction Par Be it Title be it Epithet I observe T. E. is not well pleased with it for he says that the same Luke did afterwards and to the same Theophilus dedicate his Treatise of the Acts of the Apostles without any either Title or Epithet at all but barely O Theophilus and yet this was written after the other in his riper years and when he had made a further progress in the Christian Religion And none I hope will think so good a man went from better to worse ibid. Min. You will find in p. 245. of his Book how nettled he is that I affirmed that the Quakers faith is as uncertain as their Teachers fansie and that poor deluded Souls do receive falshood railing non-sense and blasphemy as if they came from the Spirit of God c. I hope you see that I have already convicted this Quaker of falshood railing and non-sense Now I shall charge him with Blasphemy also For St. Luke was inspired with the Holy Ghost when he writ his Gospel And suppose he might at other times be guilty of an idle or an evil word and afterwards grow wiser and better Yet the Holy Ghost could not being infinitly perfect So that in truth it 's not St. Luke but the Holy Ghost who is implicitly accused by this Quaker at least of weakness and non-proficiency when he gave that Title or Epithet to Theophilus St. Basil says it 's a great blasphemy to affirm that there is one idle word in the Holy Scriptures I pray God my Antagonist may repent this rashness Par. As for Paul's address to Festus calling him Most Noble he tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might have been rendred most excellent p. 46. Min. I grant it for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both So that it was as much as if he had said If it please your Excellency Par. He says that St. Paul had reason to use it to him for in Iustice and Courteous deportment he excelled all other Magistrates that Paul had been brought before ibid. Min. Do's he commend him for Courteous deportment that 's Civil Respects as they aâ—…e called But he was so far from being either Civil or Iust to St. Paul that to please the Jews he sought to deliver him to them by endeavouring to perswade him to go up to Ierusalem to be judged among them by their Laws to the end he might fall by their Witness and Verdict Acts 25. 9 10 11. But let us consider when and upon what occasion he gave him this superlative Title Par. That is mention'd Acts 26. 24. It was in reply to Festus saying with a loud voice Paul thou art beside thy self Much Learning has made thee mad Min. I pray do you remember what answer a Quaker lately gave to one who urged this example of St. Paul for Civil Titles Par. Yes he said Perhaps Noble was his Christian Name But why do you remind me of this Min. To let you see that Ellwood's evasion is no less ridiculous For he might as well have said as his Brother Quaker did that Noble is the Christian Name of an Heathen as that St. Paul gave this Epithet to Festus for his justice and courtesie when he call'd him Mad man However you may hence infer that call but this Quaker Mad man tell him that he is besides himself and then for the courtesie perhaps for the justice thereof even in his own sentence you will merit the Epithet of Most Excellent Par. You told me that Paul and Barnabas said Sirs c. Acts 14. 15. The place T. E. says is misrenderd ' It ought to be Men c. p. 47. Min. The Greek word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as he says Beza did rightly translate viri Now let me tell our Critick that the Greeks ever distinguished between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which only signifies the humane nature in common and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which denotes manliness and courage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Multi quidem Homines pauci viri Homo ab humo denoting mortality vir a viribus denoting prowess and courage according to that excellent saying of Seneca Non sentire mala non est Hominis Non ferre non est Viri This may suffice to justisie our Translators But though it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here yet we find that Mary saluted him whom she took for the Gardiner Ioh. 20. 15. by the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Beza's Latine Domine in English Sir or Master The like did the devout Jaylor to Paul and Barnabas Acts 16. 30. Yet did neither Christ nor the Apostles reprove them for it being the usual civility of that Age. But suppose my Argument had mist the mark it aim'd at which it has not yet it cannot be denied to have hit another namely a vindication of human Learning even from my Antagonist's own practice who by the help thereof appeals from the Translation to the Original I hope he will not say that he did it
Original 'T is the conceit of this Teaching that hath made many of the Quakers despise the Scriptures What need have such says one of them of Scripture-teaching without them when they have received the same Spirit within them Another whom I could name said to a Credible Person That it had been better for him had he never read the Bible Par. But you affirmed the Scriptures were a Perfect Rule this sticks in his teeth And whereas you proved it by 2. Tim. 3. 17. He confesses the Scriptures to be profitable but hopes the Priest will not say Every thing that is profitable is a perfect and sufficient rule p. 247. Min. It 's well if My Gentleman put not on a false Vizard for this is the foundation-Principle of all Popery to deny that the Scripture is a perfect Rule And under this sconce all their other Errours do take Sanctuary wherefore the Papists call the Scripture a Leaden Rule a dead Iudge merum putamen sine nuelâ—…o a meer Nut-shell without a Kernel That the Fathers are clear in this point as well against the Papists as their Frieud Ellwood may be seen in the Confeâ—…nce P. 105. which he passes by That the Scripture is a sufficient Rule the Apostle proves sufficiently 2. Tim. 3. 15 16 17. Do's not St. Paul say there that they are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith Which they could not do were there not a Rule in order to that Salvation For the main use of a Rule is to direct us in the way we should go in The Apostle proceeds to enumerate the several particulars wherein the Scriptures may by us be profitably made use of They are profitable says he for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction Which contain all the intents and purposes of a Rule To shew that the Scripture hath all the Perfection that a Rule can have the Apostle adds that the man of God may be perfect thorowly furnished unto all good Works Let this Quaker therefore beware how he digs up Foundations especially considering how many places there are which make the Law of the Lord Perfect c. Which for brevity sake I must omit I expected that T. E. in this Chapter of Learning would have shewed us his greatest skill and accuracy but I find my self deceived his pages being filled only with pitisul shifts and evasions Lest therefore I should weary you I must desire you to pass to the next and last Chapter of his Book especially considering there is a Tract now in press called Christianity No Enthusiasm which answers all his pretensions to immediate Teaching Par. I shall only then desire you to take notice that he concludes this Chapter with the Testimonies of Tindall Iewel Bradford Philpot and Bullinger all which argue a Necessity of the Spirit in order to the interpreting of Scripture Min. I have seriously consider'd their words and do find that they either speak of the practicable knowledge of the Scriptures which is ouly to be had from the Grace of the Spirit or else of the Ordinary teaching of Gods Spirit in the use of means But where do's he find that any of these relyed on immediate Inspiration or disputed against the use of Humane Learning in Divinity Or do you think that the Quaker observed His decorum in giving Philpot the Reverend Title of a Learned Martyr in this Chapter against Learning p. 275 But to shew that T. E. has abused the Learned and Pious Philpot And that I maintain No notion of Learning different form Him Let us hear his own words I confess saith he that Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God and I acknowledge that God appointeth an Ordinary means for men to came unto knowledge now and not miraculously as He hath done in times past yet we that be taught by Men must take heed that we learn nothing but that which was taught in the Primitive Church by Revelation Par. One thing I wonder at viz. That T. E. should not say Bishop Iewel he having been Bishop of Salisbury as well as Bishop Gauden and Bishop Taylor but barely styles him Iohn Iewel a zealous defender of the Protestant Religion p. 273. Min. You will the less wonder if you consider that the design of Ellwoods Book is to blind and delude the ignorant Common people for he can hardly fancy that men whose Reason has been improved by Consideration and education can be imposed upon by so many apparent fallacies Now should He have called him Bishop Iewel then would the most Vulgar have made this Remark viz. that a man may be a Bishop and yet a zealous defender of the Protestant Religion But if T. E's design be to prove that Gods people cannot be without the assistance of His Holy Spirit he needed not to have gone to Bishop Iewel Arch-Deacon Philpot and the rest He might have brought as plain Proofs and with more Authority from the Book of Common prayer from the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England And if I say any thing to the contrary I will submit to the severest puninshment for so high a Cirme Par. I should give you no further Trouble upon this point but for one odd passage which I had like to have forgot He says The Faith which They have received is the same with that of the Primitive Christians p. 245. Min. Then let me give you a Testimony or two of their Opinion in this matter Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History lib. 5. c. 9. tells us of one Pantaenus who lived in the Second Century that He was a famous Learned man and Moderator in the School of Alexandria And that of Old disputation and exercise in Holy Scripture did flourish among them being instituted by such men as excelled in Eloquence The same Eusebius informs us that Origen perswaded to the Study of Liberal Sciences affirming them advantagious to the knowledge of Holy Scriptures being of an opinion that the exercise of Philosophical Discipline was very necessary and profitable It was an unhappy Project of Iulian the Apâ—…state to extirpate Christianity by destroying All Schools of Literature and Education for by this means saith he if we suffer them We are beaten with our own Weapons And the Christians complained of this as a very great grievance Which shews that they both used Learning and highly valued it also Saint Augustine allows the knowledg of Philosophy and other Heathen Learning to be useful in order to the expounding of Scripture and compares it to the Israelites spoiling of the Egyptâ—…ians to adorn the Tabernacle And saith that Saint Cyprian Lactantius Victorinus Optatus and Hilarius were rarely furnished with these spoils Saint Hierome was brought up in Learning from his Youth And before he set upon explaining the Scripture he Learned the Hebrew Tongue long after he was a man And hehighly commended the Mother of Rusticus who was designed for the Ministry that she brought him up
I hope these scandalous Ministers will prove but few when compared with such as truly thirst after the honour of God in a faithful discharge of their duty Here you may have a full view of the Quaker's honesty Par. But says he however the Priests have fed the People it is evident the People have fed the Priests well for they are grown fat and wanton c. p. 3. Min. But while such a number of the Priests are so slenderly provided for And while the People are so wanton as to kick at their Lawful Pastors it may be easily inferr'd who is the better fed of the two Par. Next he comes to enquire into the causes why the People are not profited under your Ministry We read says he of some in former times who did not profit the People at all and the reason thereof is also given c. In the 23d of Jeremiah vers 30. the Lord by the Prophet saith Therefore behold I am against the Prophets that steal my Word every one from his Neighbour Behold I am against the Prophets saith the Lord that use their Tongues and say He saith Behold I am against them that prophesie false dreams saith the Lord and do tell them and cause my People to err by their lyes and by their lightness yet I sent them not nor commanded them therefore they shall not profit this People at all saith the Lord v. 32. Here the very Ground and Reason why that Ministry did not profit nay why it was rendred uncapable of profiting the People at all is most plainly given by God himself viz. He sent them not nor commanded them p. 4. Min. That this Scripture does not reach his purpose will be evident if we consider 1. That this non-proficiency of some of the People do's not inferr that we are not sent seeing it may proceed from other causes In the careless hearers of Ieremiah it proceeded not from any corruption in his Doctrine which was Divine nor of his Life which was Holy but from the hardness of the Peoples hearts in that they would not bearken In the hearers of the false Prophets it proceeded from their dreams lyes and lightness which they taught and to which the People trusted 2. That this Scripture is ignorantly and injuriously applied to the present Ministry appears in that those false Prophets perswaded the People and that to the ruine of that Nation that Jerusalem should not be destroyed that they should neither see Sword nor Famine Which was an Errand upon which God never sent them Besides they were a company of Fanatick Enthusiasts who cheated the People by false pretences to extraordinary inspirations I have dreamed I have dreamed was their canting note Not to profit the People then is in the true sense of this Scripture not to secure them from the Captivity and Calamities hanging over that Nation Now let us examine how truly this Scripture is applied to the present Ministry Do We come with any new Errand to the World or pretend to extraordinary inspirations to confirm it as those did Or do We Preach peace to impenitent sinners No the contrary is well known So the words do rebound upon the Quakers themselves while in their strange doctrines and misconstructions of Holy Scripture they are guilty of the same fault with those lying Prophets in saying The Lord saith when he hath not said and in their presumptuous pretences to Revelation to confirm it as also in opposing the true Ministers of God as those Fanaticks opposed Ieremiah Par. But he denies your Ministry when he saith Hath God sent thene or do they send one another That they are Ministers of Mans making common experience shews page 6. Min. I answer The Ministry in general is distinguisht into Ordinary and extraordinary Thus it was under the Law and under the Gospel too Of old the Priesthood belonged to the head of every Family challenged by a right of primogeniture But when the House of Israel multiplied into many Families it pleased God for the more advantageous settlement of his Church and the better Government thereof to devolve the Priesthood upon Aaron and to call him to the same in an extraordinary manner by a Commission from Heaven to Moses for his Consecration and to settle that Priesthood successively upon his Posterity without any further need of an extraordinary Call to the Priests of succeeding Generations Such too was the Evangelical Ministry For Aaron's Priesthood being antiquated The Apostles were called to their Function in an extraordinary manner even by Christ himself and by the visible descent of the Holy Ghost were accordingly qualified for the discharge of it Yet even in the Apostles days this Extraordinary Call ceased For Timothy and Titus were Ordain'd by imposition of hands and were commanded so to Ordain others by which means the Ministry was by the Divine Ordinance to descend to all Ages in an orderly succession though not in one Family as Aaron's did These things thus premised do determine our present case as followeth He that is sent according to the order appointed by God in Holy Scripture though by the Ministry of men is not a Minister of man's making but of God's But both the Priests of the Law and the Priests of the Gospel though consecrated and Ordained by the Ministry of Men were sent according to the order appointed by God Therefore they were not Ministers of Man's making but of God's and by him truly call'd and sent Were Timothy and Titus Ministers only of Man's making because they were ordain'd by imposition of hands And if many of the people did not profit by their Ministry as many of the Cretian's did not by Titus's was the fault think you in their not being sent Par. No sure Min. Do you suppose T. E. himself could be ignorant of a truth so obvious Par. Methinks he should not Min. What then should he mean by saying We send one another and by that common experience which he says shews that we are Ministers of Man's making Par. What can he mean by it but your going to the Bishop for Orders as common experience shews you do Min. Truly his words stand very fair for this meaning and therefore not only you but doubtless his whole Fraternity and many others do so take it and through ignorance may be corrupted by it and made to believe We are not sent by God because ordained by the Ministry of Men. Par. Indeed I cannot deny but this passage brought me under some scruples till you gave me this satisfaction Min. If T. E. could not be ignorant in so plain a Case what can be his design here Whatever a Man pretends to mean by any of his expressions yet to set them down in such terms as will impose upon vulgar Readers and engage them in error can surely be no upright dealing Par. No how should it But if says he speaking still of the Ministers of England they ministred by the
in his Discipleship And indeed the Scriptures do artribute to him a higher mode of Prophecy than ordinary Now the great and principal work of a Prophet was to teach and instruct the people This is evident from the Scripture 2 Pet. 2. 1. False Prophets and false Teachers do there explain one another And Prophesying is put for Expounding and teaching the will of God 1 Cor. 13. 2. and 14. 1 3. And he that expoundeth and declareth another's mind and meaning is called his Prophet Exod. 7. 1 4 16 And Christ's great work in the exercise of his Prophetical Office was to teach the people and to reveal his Father's will We may therefore safely conclude that Moses's Chair is the Chair of Doctrine For it was the custom of those times for Teachers to sit while they taught as several of the Iewish Doctors and also the antient Commentaries under St. Ambrose's name on 1 Cor. 14. 29 30. do inform us In conformity to this Custom Christ himself taught sitting and the antient Philosophers did the same as Grotius noteth upon the place where he quoteth Seneca calling them Cathedrarii that is Chair-men That Moses's Chair is thus to be taken will further appear from the Persons sitting in it Christ's discourse is not concerning Iudges and Magistrates but Teachers as appears from ver 4. where we read They bound heavy burthens c. that is expounded the Law with intolerable strictness by adding their Traditions to it see Acts 15. 10 28. and accordingly the Iews called a thing forbidden by the Doctors Ligatum viz. a thing bound and a thing permitted Solutum or loosed Christ mentions none but Scribes and Pharisees excluding Sadducees who yet were members of their Sanhedrins as well as the other And if he had spoken concerning their Sanhedrins the Priests would no doubt have been mention'd especially the high Priest who was a Chief member of them in our Saviour's time Now that the Scribes here mention'd did succeed the Prophets in their office and Employment is clear from the Scripture Behold says our Saviour I send you Prophets Wise-men and Scribes Mat. 23. 34. Where the one do's expound the other In 1 Cor. 1. 20. Wise-men and Scribes are conjoyn'd For such as were educated in the Learning and wisdom of the Law and professed it were called Scribes Ezra is called a Scribe ch 7. 12. to which sense Christ alludeth Mat. 13. 52. In antient times many were educated in Schools and Colledges to be Prophets But when the gift of Prophesy ceased among that people then they remained Scribes only accordingly Maimonides says that the Reason why Baruch was so discontented was because he had spent so much time under Jeremiah to obtain the gift of Prophesy yet was constrain'd to go without it So that he was called Baruch the Scribe only Wherefore the true notion of Scribes is this They were Students Learned men and Teachers * of the Law to the People as the Prophets were of old but without the gift of Prophecy Succeeding them in their Office but not in their extraordinary Mission and Supernatural Endowments Hence our Lord says that they sate in Moses's seat As for the word Pharisees that denoteth their Sect and way of Religion only most of the Scribes being of that sect as is probable because it was so much in vogue with the people From this Scripture thus explain'd it will follow 1. That Persons without an Extraordinary mission and Supernatural Endowments may be true Successors of them that had both as the Scribes were of the ancient Prophets 2. That men may be God's Officers though they have not that Immediate mission from him For if the Scribes were not God's Officers they did not sit in Moses's Chair in Christ's sence This is so obvious that even Heathen Magistrates are called God's Ministers Rom. 13. 4. 3. That whatever Such as have the Office and Authority to Teach tho' bad men do teach jure Cathedrae as Grotius expresses it keeping themselves within the Sphere of their Authority They ought to be obeyed in Par. You said that our Saviour hath given the people an Eternal Document when such Teachers as live not answerably to their Doctrine fall to their share An eternal Document What 's that p. 20. Min. I told you in our Saviour's own words Whatsoever they bad them to observe that to observe and do but not to do after their works Mat. 23. 3. Par. Nay hold there says he we have had too much of that already England hath not yet forgot since the Scribes and Pharisees of Rome saâ—…e in the Chair here c. ibid Min. Had it been a Turk Iew or profest Atheist that had accosted me with this reply I should have receiv'd it without any surprize at all But seeing this Quaker pretends to Christianity is it not strange that He should fall foul upon Christ himself Had it been a Document of mine own framing though never so reasonable I should not have wonder'd to see him exercise his Sophistry upon i t But it being a Document of our blessed Lord's and deliver'd in no other but his own express words and in his own sense Methinks the Honour and Authority of the Author should have deterr'd him from this Confidence and perswaded him to have been more sparing How would the barbarous Iews have hugg'd themselves and how much innocency would they have pleaded if in the days of Christ they had been furnisht with this Quaker's Argument For had it been broacht then much louder had the Crucifige's rung in Pilat's ears Might not they have argued at Ellwood's rate Hast not thou commanded us to observe and do whatsoever the Scribes and Pharisees bid us We are now set on by them 'T is they that bid us Crucify thee Then from thy self we have an authority to execute this command of theirs So that I must answer my Antagonist in Isaiah's Dialect 2 Kings 19. 22. Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed and against whom hast thou exalted thy voice and lifted thine eyes on high even against the Holy one of Israel Par. I must confess that the Consequences from this gloss are very odious therefore I pray give me now the true sense of the text Min. I cannot do it better than in the words of St. Chrysostom an Author whom this Quaker pretends to have a very good opinion of and whose Authority he misquotes against me with so much triumph p. 120 and 188. Let us here him therefore descanting upon this Document by Theophilact The Lord speaketh of those who fit in Moses's Chair that is of those who teach what is in the Law those therefore who teach the Divine Law we ought to hear tho they do it not themselves Further he objects as Ellwood here But must we do all things they say tho they be evil things We answer says he First that he that teacheth will hardly be so audacious as ever to exhort to things directly evil
that the Scripture may be in the Mother-Tongue and LEARNING set up in the UNIVERSITIES That these Martyrs aforemention'd were Godly men T. E. himself confesses From which confession of his you may reasonably make this Inference That men may be Arch-Bishops Bishops Arch-Deacons Prebendaries and Parsons may encourage University-Education sons may live and die Conformable to the Doct rine and Discipline of the Church of England may Administer both the Sacraments may hold it Robbery and Sacrilege to deprive the People of but a part of the Lord's Supper may defend infant-Baptism take Oaths daily confess themselves to be miserable Sinners may say You to a single Person give and receive Titles of Honour may take Tithes and agreeably to Christ's Doctrine affirm it unlawful for any man to divide the External Unity of the Church by separating from that particular Congregation whereof he is a member for the faults or ill life of the Preacher And yet even in Ellwood's judgment be GODLY Men. Now if these were Godly Martyrs why must we be accounted Ungodly for retaining the same Doctrins and Constitutions I heartily wish the Quakers would be of the same Religion these good men were of for then they would be of our Religion too and then but not before I should acknowledg them Their Martyrs Par. Whereas you told me that a man is to look at the water not at the Conduit through which it is conveyed Conf. p. 15. To this he answers But if a man see the Conduit besmeared with mire and dirt will he choose or is it reasonable he should be tyed to drink the water that issues therefrom c p. 21. Min. The outside of the Conduit may be defiled and yet the pipes and water in them may be clean Man's evil actions do not hinder his speaking well nor doth the wickedness of the Sower infect the seed as was determin'd in an old British Council under Saint Patrick Par. To your instance of Iudas he says he was bad enough but will you say that after he had transgressed and faln he should if he had lived have continued in the Ministry p. 22. Min. This is an idle query far remote from our present business started on purpose to avoid the question which was not to enquire whether Iudas should have continued in his Apostleship after his horrid treason had not the divine Vengeance pursued him to death but the question was whether Iudas was a Good man or Bad during the exercise of his Apostolical Function before that Treason was committed That he was both an Apostle and a Bad man is certain and confest by my Adversary Therefore 't is clear enough what I before asserted that an Ill man may notwithstanding be a true Minister of the Gospel Here you may see that I am not pleading the Cause of Iudas or any like him For I wish such were ejected But till this be fairly done by just Authority we may not allow the people to separate from them seeing our Saviour never caused his Disciples to separate from Iudas tho' he knew him and declared him to be a Devil Ioh. 6. 70 71. Now that the people are not tied and fetter'd according to T. E's expression to Ministers incorrigibly ill but may have remedy by a Judicial way of Proceeding appears from the 26. Article of this Church And to my knowledg some accordingly have been Ejected from their Offices and Benefices Par. As for Nicholas the Deacon whom you mention'd his Office was to serve tables to take care of the widows c. he was chosen to be Overseer of the poor c. however it appears not that he was a publick Preacher ibid. Min. If I rightly understand this Quaker the Offices of a Deacon and an overseer of the poor are according to him one and the same Then probably his next work will be to quarrel with our Magistrates or rather with the Laws of the Land that the Overseers of the poor are not ordained into their Function by Prayer and Imposition of hands as the Deacons were Acts. 6. 6. But why might not he be a Preacher as well as his Collegue St. Stephen However this I must ask If the Quakers plead that his Deaconship did not qualify him for a publick Preacher How dare they men and women every one at their pleasure take upon them to preach being neither Priests nor Deacons Do's not this contradict and make void their pretence of the Spirit 's Moving them And whereas T. E. says that neither the Scriptures nor Eusebius say He continued his Deaconship after his Defection I answer neither do they say he was cast out of his Deaconship which was my Adversarie's part to have proved but he saw that be could not make that out whereupon he says that it appears not he was a publick Preaocher concerning which I have said what is sufficient already But whatever the Preacher is the people are accountable for all the instructions they hear concerning their respective duties both to God and man How will Ellwood deny this Par. Ay but says he might his Parishioner well have replyed Those discourses made little impression upon me when I consider'd from whom they came c. p. 23. Min. Ay Indeed Is this the Quaker's Divinity to say this would have been well replyed That the Sermons of his duty to God and man made little impression upon him No pretence I am sure can justify this Reply But it 's too apparent the contrary Command of our blessed Saviour lately explained to you has made little impression upon this Quaker whereby the people are straitly enjoyn'd not to disobey their Teachers tho' Scribes and Pharisees nor to plead their ill life to excuse their own disobedience as this Quaker here encourages the people to do having to this end no doubt aforehand corrupted that text as you have heard but in quite opposit terms Whatsoever they bid them concerning their said duty to God and man that to observe and do tho' not after their works This Quaker in the mean time forgot that heavy sentence of our Saviour's Mat. 5. 19. Whosoever shall break one of these least Commandments and teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven that is excluded from the Priviledges of it I am confident he cannot think this Plea which he teaches the people will hold good at the last Day For while Goodness is Goodness and Truth is Truth whoever speaks it God will then demand an account of it from all that heard it And whatever prophane men and promoters of Satan's Kingdom may talk and vent at this distance from that Day Yet they will then find Ellwood's Plea insufficient to answer these Questions If you Discerned the actions of your Teacher to be EVIL why then did you not avoid them His Example did not compel you to be Bad And if you Discerned his Instructions to be GOOD why then did you not follow them Why did you
the old Testament and of the Greek in the new And if this had not been observed by the Apostles in their Preaching how could they have been understood by men of so many different Languages as we find they spake to Acts 2. seeing every language has its peculiar phrases and proprieties of speech Therefore God's complying with those national customs of speech then is a rule to us to do the like now Otherwise a man would be a Barbarian to those he converses with Now the word of God is never so much abused as when the phrases of it are plausibly used while the sense of it is pâ—…rverted and applyed to evil purposes to maintain schism faction and the like and this we call Canting an Instance hereof we have in Corah and his company who even in an Act of Rebellion could cry The Congregation is holy and the Lord is among them their sin being much aggravated by their gainsaying Authority in holy language Par. Yet says he we know there is a form of words and we desire to keep to it ibid. Min. Here is one instance among many in his book of this Quaker's Canting in his demure and impertinent bringing in a Scripture phrase nothing at all belonging to the subject in hand but quite to another matter However one thing I like well that sound words in the opinion of a Quaker may be contained in a form But if he allude to that form of sound words which St. Paul gave to Timothy That you must know was no such thing as a Gang of phrases but a Creed or short Summary of Christian Religion by the use of which he might be enabled to withstand the opposition of growing heresies And therefore to bring in this to the subject in hand to make the sense of these words to imply a Grammar or Dictionary to direct the Conscience in the use of words and phrases as his brethren no doubt do understand him is a thing which sure He upon more serious thoughts will be unwilling to defend and therefore he had done faithfully to have interpreted his meaning If by sound words he mean an entire and plain Confession of Faith or a summary of those things that are necessary to be believed unto Salvation I know no such thing subscribed by the body of them for that would fix them to something when indeed they are yet fix'd to nothing This miserable defect is far remote from the uprightness and ingenuity of the Apostles in giving their Hearers an account of their Fundamental Principles in a short Form to let men see to the bottom of their Religion T is true indeed some Quakers have pretended to set down in their books the heads of their belief But then 1. No man knows whether the rest will subscribe to them while they have been so different from one another even in Fundamental Points 2. That croud of Scripture texts which they quote has been generally so erroneously misinterpreted and misapplied by them that even where they write little else but Scripture words we have reason to suspect their meaning Therefore when you were so inclined to Quakerism would you have turn'd to you knew not what to a dangerous Religion you cannot see to the bottom of What kind of Religion is this of the Quakers whereof their Leaders either can not or dare not give any entire and intelligible account Do not these Teachers use this as a piece of Craft to reserve to themselves a liberty to preach what Doctrine yea what heresy they please I pray God draw their Followers out of their snares and grant all unstable people Grace and Discretion to keep off from them and their meetings As for that which we and the Universal Church of Christ embrace under the name of the Apostles Creed as the Mark and Badge of a Christian the Quakers tenents are such as give us little reason to think they will own it while some have held one Heresy some another Some have denied the Holy Trinity Some have pretended Equality with God One of the Heads of 'em pretended to be the Messiah Another of their cheif men affirmed himself to be the Judge of the world and to see mens hearts and has been by some of his Party call'd the Son of God Others have affirmed that Christ in the flesh and all he did and suffer'd was but a Figure and nothing but an example Others if not most of them think they have no need of outward Teaching by reading and hearing the Holy Scriptures read and applied And that the Holy Scriptures are not the word of God That there is no mediate Call to the Ministry c. so far are they degenerate from the Christian Faith Now what fault finds T. E. with us for saying You to a single Person Par. I do not see that he blames you for putting the singular and plural number together as unlawful in it self but for the pride and flattery which he says first put Inferiors upon paying a Plural respect to the single Person of every Superior and Superiors upon receiving and at last requiring it ibid. and which are still cherished thereby p. 28 29. Min. As for the pride and flattery he speaks of you must consider that the best actions are liable to such imputations Even Almes-deeds Fasting and Prayer in the Pharisees proceeded from vain-glory But then did their pride lessen the value of those good Actions in others who constantly perform'd them or make Alms-deeds Fasting and Prayer unlawful And is it unlawful for an honest Man to use an innocent expression of respect because ill Men may abuse it to pride and flattery I hope he will not say that those whom he owns for Godly Martyrs used it from such evil principles But whether think you is there more pride in our useing it as a testimony of respect or their sawcy denying it to Superiors even to the King himself in an affectation of singularity and in opposition to a lawful custom Par. Truly I know not how to clear them but T. E. tells us that in the best times and with the best Men Thou and Thee were inoffensive language ibid. Min. It was custom that made them so But what were those times and Men which he calls the best Par. Those under the Common-wealth of Rome before it was turn'd into an Empire p. 28. Min. What those the best times and best men in the very height of Paganism and Idolatry Did our Common-wealths-man here remember that Christ was born and lived under the Roman Empire and paid obedience to it Or did he consider that afterwards many of the Emperors themselves proved zealous Patrons of Christianity yet did neither alter their Dialect nor the imperial Government as inconsistent with the Christian Religion Par. I doubt he was a little inconsiderate here but he says that You to a single person with other Titles c. seems to have its rise with the Roman Empire ibid. Min.
rest of his discourse on this subject is spent in artifices to render me and my Doctrine odious but upon the Principles I have already laid down in the stating of this Case of Perfection they will appear neither to need nor deserve an Answer Par. But there is one thing which must not be omitted T. E. thinks you and others who set your selves in opposition to this truly Gospel Doctrine of being perfectly deliver'd and preserved from sin to be as the Evil Spies who discouraged the heart of the Children of Israel that they should not go into the Land which the Lord had given them c. p. 98 99. Min. The Quaker has brought this comparison to his Disadvantage Did the Good Spies Ioshuah and Caleb ever tell the Children of Israel as T. E. do's the Quakers that they should get such a perfect victory over those Canaanites as that no remainders of them should be left to disturb and vex them any more No such thing but the Scriptures tell them the contrary just as we do to Christians concerning their Spiritual Enemies See Deut. 7. 22. thou mayst not consume them at once and in matter of fact 't is evident they were not wholly driven out or consumed 'T is the Quakers therefore and not Ours that is the discouraging Doctrine For â—…f a perfect freedom from all sins and infirmities here be taught as the necessary condition of obtaining Heaven hereafter then all humble Souls sincerely thirsting after Righteousness standing upon their constant watch and yet finding imperfections wants and infirmities in themselves will if they believe this Doctrine be driven into inevitable despair There are sins of Omission as well as of Commission How many accidents may hinder us from performing our Devotions with that vigour intentness and exactness as the purity and sublimity of the Precepts do require The very Constitutions of our Bodies the influence of the Clime and Season may hinder the performance of our Duties with an exact perfection And therefore we flee to God for Mercy in the performance of our best Services See Nehem. 13. 14 22. So that they do most effectually keep Men from coming to Heaven who build this fools Paradise of imaginary unsinning Perfection for them to dwell in on Earth wherein they grow so proud and conceited that they sit down on this side Iordan and fansie they have no need of Ioshua to conduct them into the true Land of Promise In effect they deny the Gospel despise the death of Christ rely on their own Perfection and I fear tumble into Hell while they vainly dream of Heaven CHAP. VI. Of Swearing Par. NOW we are come to T. E's Chapter of Swearing which is so very long that it consists of no less than 104. pages therefore I shall only propound to you the most material passages in it He begins with a reflexion on that short digression which you made upon the two Covenants and very gravely tells us that you tread in an unbeaten Path p. 101. Min. Had he been acquainted with Authors and not taken things upon trust he would not have accused the account I gave off the two Covenants as a peculiar Notion oâ—… my own when the same has been asserted by the greatest Clerks in Christendom I could fill a Page with Citations of such Authors if it were needful as concurr in the same Notion I shall only name two viz. Dr. Hammond in his Practical Catechism and the excellent Author of the Whole Duty of Man in the Preface of that same Treatise which when T. E. hath consulted he will be be satisfied that I have trodden in no unbeaten Path But seeing T. E. will have it my own Notion and there being so much matter before us upon this Subject of Oaths which in the Conference was primarily intended I will pass on to that and examine my Adversaries Objections and extravagances on this Subject Par. He would gladly clear R. Hubberthorn from that impertinence and dishonesty where with you charged him in acknowledging Oaths lawful in the times of the Old Testament yet alledging Hos. 4. 3. Zech. 5. 3. Texts out of the Old Testament to prove them unlawful now which he says you call his proofs though he do not so himself and hints as if they were only set in the Title-page of the Book p. 106. Min. However they were at first in the Title-page I found them in the Book it self And if they be not Proofs what are they then So here is an implicit acknowledgment of a Quaker's bringing Scripture to prove nothing Par. He thinks you mistake the Case for they are not says he brought against that which was then lawful but against that which was then unlawful namely the wrong use and abuse of Oaths ibid. Min. Wonderful ingenuity I thought the question had not been Whether perjury but whether any Oaths were lawful Now to what end is a quotation brought but to prove the Subject in hand In a word then I desire the Quakers to take notice that these Scriptures viz. Hos. 4. 3. Zech. 5. 3. do not reprove all Oaths as unlawful Par. You told me that an Oath is an Act of Natural Religion but he tells us that all acts of Religion are not acts of Natural Religion as in the case of Circumcision p. 110. Min. 'T is very true that all such acts of Religion as owe their original to a Positive Command and have no reason in the nature of the thing to put mankind upon the observation of them as in the case of Circumcision these are not acts of Natural Religion for T. E. may read the definition of Natural Religion in Bishop Wilkins's Discourse upon that Subject pag. 39. That is Natural Religion which Men might know and should be obliged unto by the meer Principles of Reason improved by consideration and experience without the help of Revelation Now an Oath came into use among men from the meer Principles of Reason improved by consideration without the help of Revelation So that if an Oath be an Act of Religion it must be an act or part of Natural Religion For the first that ever required an Oath was Abimelech a Gentile Gen. 21. 23. He required Abraham to swear And Abraham said I will swear ver 24. Yet we read not that either Abimelech's requiring or Abraham's consenting to it was by any positive command from God So that T. E. must grant that Men were led to bind their Covenants by a solemn calling of God to witness and that by the light of Nature of which more anon But when I say an Oath is an act or part of Natural Religion I do not insist that it is by Natural Religion commanded primarily simply and per se towards God but subordinately implicitly and by consequence as a necessary medium for the publick good in this state of things For the Law of Nature that commands the end must also command the only means So that the use of an
there is and though at our first Conference this was but an Occasional Transition yet T. E. thinks it of such moment as to make it the main Subject you see of a whole Chapter And indeed if the question be stated we shall find very little work upon this Subject Par. Pray then do you state the Case Min. To take a Text then and to compose a Sermon thereon is to pitch upon some portion of Scripture to expound the same and from thence to raise such observations and remarks as in the Preacher's judgment tend most to the instruction and edification of the people So that the Question will be this Whether thus to pitch upon a portion of Scripture to explain and to recommend the knowledge and practice thereof to the people be displeasing to the Majesty of Heaven If it be Then are the Quakers in the right and we truly are faulty But if it be not there being the Breach of no Law to make it a sin Then you and others may take notice that it 's not God's Cause and Quarrel that this Quaker is defending but the contradicting and turbulent Spirit of his own Party Par. You told me that St. Peter in Acts 2. and St. Paul in Acts 13. took Texts c. To this T. E. replies that if you and your Brethren have no better warrant for singling out a Text and composing your Sermons out of it than these Scriptures afford your practice will appear to be very weakly grounded p. 196 197. Min. The Quaker I perceive opposes the Lawfulness of taking a Text c. because not warranted by an express Command from Scripture which has been the sottish mistake of these later Ages as if Nothing ought to be done without a Scripture-command These Men would do well to explain their great Principle what they mean by Scripture-warrant and to answer the Learned Discourses of Mr. Hooker upon this Subject which none of our Sectaries hitherto have been so hardy as to undertake As to the present practice of Preaching upon Texts I have shewed the expediency of it already produced Scripture Examples and could produce more if there were occasion And now I shall produce Church Presidents Though indeed none of these are necessary in a Matter left to the Conduct of Prudence and I hope you remember that the main of my Answer to this Scruple was this that the Apostles and We act under different Circumstances they might sometimes speak by the sole Authority of infallible inspiration We take Texts to shew that we have no other doctrine to deliver but what is taken out of the written word of God c. this was the chief thing he should have replied to yet he do's by this as by the weightiest Passages in the Conference Answers it by silence Par. Pray produce your Church Presidents Min. I shall instance in Basil the Great He took Texts and Preached upon them as may be seen in those Homilies on the 15th Psalm quoted by this Quaker against me The same practice appears by the more Ancient Homiles of Origen another of his Authors on Leviticus Numbers and St. Matthew And most plainly by St. Augustine in his Sermons on the words of our Lord and the Apostle where that Holy Father singles out a verse or two out of the Epistle or Gospel appointed for that Sunday and Preaches on them And if T. E. please to read his 30th Sermon he will find that he takes for his Text the words of St. Iames Above all things my Brethren swear not Where he may learn besides That Texts were used in those early times how different his judgment is from the Primitive Fathers in the point of swearing c. Since St. Augustin's time Examples are infinite for the taking of Texts though not prescribed by any Canon of the Church For though All of us pitch upon a Subject yet do we not always name a Text as appears by the Church Homilies which are so many orderly Discourses upon certain Points Par. As for your instance of our Saviour's Preaching on a Text Luk. 14. 17. He denies not the Fact but says it was in the time of the Law and suitable to that Ministration p. 200. Min. By this shuffle he will make all the examples which our Saviour set before us in his Holy Life to be no presidents for our imitation Or as if it were Lawful to expound Texts of Scripture under the Law but not under the Gospel Or as if to expound Texts under the Law were peculiar to that Ministration Par. But T. E. has another charge against the Priests that they take Texts to get Money by c. p. 204. Min. A virtuous Man may Marry a Woman with a good Portion and yet be farr from making Money the End of his Marriage But I shall pass by this for the same reason I did before when I met with it in Hubberthorn Because it is Railing not Arguing I shall only now desire you and all sober Men to judge whether a Methodical orderly and regular Discourse be not more profitable for the people than a loose rambling overall points without any method coherence or visible scope according to the wild practice of the Quakers This may suffice to vindicate our Taking Texts since it was practised by Christ and His Apostles Used by the Primitive Fathers and is the Custom of this Church being also found to be the safest way to prevent wandering from the Scripture Rule the easiest to be understood and remembred and the way now used throughout all Christendom except in the Quakers Confused Assemblies Where there is No Order and therefore 't is no wonder that Their Preachments are immethodical roving and as hard to be Understood as they are to be remembred CHAP. VIII Of Humane Learning Divine Inspiration and Revelation Par. IN the beginning of T. E's Discourse of Humane Learning He mainly insists on these three things First he brings a Charge against You in making it Necessary to the interpreting of Scripture Secondly Whereas you charged Hubberthorn for saying Peter was unlearned when he opened the Scriptures T. E. tells us that the Scripture says it expresly Acts 4. 13. And Thirdly to your Query Whether there was not difference between Peter the Fisher-man and Peter the Disciple He saith there was When He was a Fisher-man he was carnally minded but afterwards being a Disciple he became spiritually minded c. p. 205 206. Min. To these I shall give a distinct Answer and in as few words as the matter will bear And I must tell you that T. E. hath here egregiously falsified my words falsified the Scripture and abused both St. Peter and himself First I say he hath falsified my words in saying I make Humane Learning necessary c. Humane is a word of his own shuffling in and never so much as named in the page he quotes nor in all my Discourse to you upon that Subject I know that St. Peter was a true
Interpreter of Scripture and that he had not his Learning by Humane means but by inspiration Secondly He hath falsified the Scripture in affirming that it says expresly that St. Peter was unlearned c. Which is an express untruth For he may as well say that the Scriptures expresly say that our Saviour was a Wine-bibber c. Indeed the Scripture tells us in the place he quotes that the High-priest and others perceived that Peter and John were unlearned and ignorant Men c. But was all Gospel which They either said or perceived Were all the perceptions and opinions of the Jewish Council express Truths This is to make the Scripture own whatsoever it relates of wicked and mistaken Men. Thirdly T. E. has abused St. Peter in saying He was carnally minded This being a calumny which He cannot prove For doubtless St. Peter was a Good Man when he was a Fisherman Par. But methinks his greatest oversight is this that He having endeavour'd from Acts 4. to prove St. Peter and St. Iohn two express Ignoramus's he should so soon contradict himself and tell us that our Saviour before his Ascension opened their Understandings which was an immediate and inward Operation of his Spirit and Power upon them that they might understand the Scriptures p. 207. Min. You may see what shifts an ill Cause brings a Man into It seems he opened their Understandings before his Ascension and yet they were unlearned and ignorant after his Ascension as if they had Lost and not Gain'd by it And he is not too in his Notion of the opening of their understandings which he calls an immediate operation of his Spirit and Power For that it was not Our Saviour opened their Understandings by his convincing Arguments thus it is written and thus it behoved Christ to suffer ver 46. And if Christ had then inspired them with that immediate and inward Operation of his Spirit and Power How comes he in the 49th verse to command them to tarry in the City of Jerusalem till they were endued with Bower from on high intimating that as yet they had not received it Par. After a great many repetitions of the word Humane which was never put in by you He brings a heavy Charge against you That you make Humane Learning all in all and Not a word of the Spirit of God p. 211. Min. This is a notorious Calumny and if it were as he says Why do's he so often cite the 103. page of the Conference where I say The Spirit helpeth us to understand old Truths already Revealed in Scripture and that We pray for his Assistance therein Indeed I did not so often mention the Spirit in that Discourse because it was not the Matter of our debate being denyed by neither side But Learning is that which the Quakers deny and that which I am now defending And to oblige the Quaker I will now put in the word Humane since Tongues are ceased Which yet is farr from excluding the Spirit of God Should I say that Plowing and Sowing are necessary to procure Corn I do not thereby deny God's Blessing to be necessary For indeed Both are necessary They as natural means This as a Divine efficacy to make them prosper Even so I say humane Learning is necessary in these Ages for the right interpreting of Scripture But then this Assertion is far from denying the Assistance of the Spirit which sanctifies our Learning So that this is a malicious conclusion he draws from my words Par. But he thinks that you have contradicted your self in asserting the necessity of Learning to the interpreting of Scriptures i. e. the hard places in the Scriptures for your preceding words shew that to be your meaning When as you afterwards affirm That the necessary points of Religion are not hard to be understood And he is so pleas'd with this that for fear the Reader should not take notice of it he repeats it over and over as p. 212 215 234 268. Min. I find He is so tickled with this invention that when he has nothing to say He fills up his pages with a repetition of this seeming Contradiction But I must tell the Quaker that he deals here most injuriously with me For these two places of mine were not spoken upon one and the same occasion nor do they belong to the same Subject For in the 90th page of my Book I am speaking of Preaching and Interpreting Scripture to others In p. 92. I am discoursing of private Christians understanding so much of Scripture as is necessary to their own Salvation which they may attain without humane Learning otherwise none but the Learned can be saved Now the Quaker disingenuously wrests all my Discourse to Preaching p. 213 214. But let us see what consequence there is in his Arguments an Unlearned Man may know what is necessary to his own Salvation therefore He may be a Preacher unto others Rare arguing Is every Man that can write his own hand-writing fit to be a Writing-master Or every Souldier that can handle his Arms fit to be a General Or every Clown that can draw a Bill or Bond fit to be a Counsellor or a Judge A little knowledge with an honest Heart and good Life may do a Man 's own business but surely it requires more to be an interpreter of Scripture to Preach to defend the Faith against Hereticks to instruct exhort comfort and and reprove in due season Methinks T. E. might have been more ingenuous than to sport himself with his own impostures and so falsly to represent the passages of my Book having done by it as Dionyfius did by Apollo's Statue Whose Silver Mantle he took off and then clad it with his own Course Cloth and when he had so done laughed it to scorn Par. I observe that T. E. goes on at this rate picking up three passages spoken on different occasions to raise this observation that Learning is only necessary to the understanding of those things which are least necessary p. 215. Min. Suppose it did follow from my words that it is a Minister's Duty to Apply things that are plain and make them more plain this is no inconsiderable employment St. Peter thought it his duty to be a Monitor and to put the Churches in remembrance of things they knew 2 Pet. 1. 12. And it requires Skill and Learning to manage even the plainest things to the best advantage of the people And though I said the Difficult places of Scripture were least necessary I did not say they were unnecessary which would have been blasphemy to assert For there is not that Place but the understanding of it may be useful nay necessary too when such as T. E. pervert them to the overthrowing of the Faith of some Par. Now he tells us that he passes on to your second observation on 2 Pet. 3. 16. not finding any thing further in your first that is remarkable save that in p. 94. you again acknowledge that those
passages in Scripture that are of the greatest Concern are written in such a plain and familiar style that the weakest and most illiterate or unlearned c. shall not be able to excuse the neglect of them c. p. 216. Min. It 's T. E's old subtilties to call what he cannot answer Minute and less material passages and here he says he do's not find any thing further that is remarkable when indeed he hath left unanswered the most remarkable passage of all even that in page 91. of my Book My Argument there was this If St. Paul ' s Epistles were hard then in those days of primitive light and purity and extraordinary inspiration and even to those that were acquainted with the Original Languages wherein they were written and with the peculiar Proverbs and proprieties of them If they were hard then to those who well understood the rites and customs of the people to whom they were particularly written and who might be easily informed of the particular occasion and by that means of the true scope of them How much more difficult must they needs be to us at this distance c. This had been worth the Quaker's pains to have answered and ours to dispute about So that I have no reason to take any further notice of him when thus he skips over the main of my Arguments But neither you nor any other can remain unsatisfied of the Necessity of humane Learning if you will peruse a Treatise on that Subject written by Mr. Reyner of Lincoln Par. But methinks he yields the Cause For he tells us that it is not their manner to deride Learning or any way to undervalue it which in its place is good and serviceable p. 217. Min. I doubt His Party will scarce thank him for this Concession who for many years made it a great part of their Religion to decry it One whose Name is not affixt to his works saith that the Original of Tongues was in the days of Nimrod that Heretick Though I must tell that Learned Antiquary that Nimrod was rather an Atheist than Heretick But I pray wherein then is Learning good and serviceable In Natural Civil or Humane Affairs p. 218. Min. If so why do's he make use of it himself in a Controversie of Religion And why do's he pretend so much to esteem that Learning which the Translators of the Scripture made use of in that Work p. 264. Par. T. E. has one objection against humane Learning c. Which to me seems very considerable and to have more in it than the whole Chapter besides If says he want of Humane Learning were the Cause why the Scriptures are wrested How comes it to pass that they are wrested by those that have Humane Learning p. 219. Min. Seeing you look upon this objection as considerable you shall have the fuller Answer to it Let us look back into former Ages and we shall find that No Heretick was famous for Learning in the two first Centuries Montanus was for Inspiration as are the Quakers and as horrible a Wrester of the Scriptures as they are Calling himself the Paraclet or Comforter that was for to come Manes was a Persian slave void of all ingenuous literature and education and He broached the Manechaean Heresie Arâ—…ius was a Man of plausible eloquence but of no great Learning And I would have T. E. shew us any one of the Hereticks that did come near to the profound Learning which was in those Glorious Lights of the Church Iustin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Athanasius Basil Nazianzen Chrysostome Hierome Ambrose Augustine Eusebius Theodoret c. These Holy Fathers were some of them admirably skill'd in Languages all of them in Histories Laws Rites and Customs yea in most of the Liberal Sciences all which they got by Education And he must be a Stranger to primitive times who knows not how God made use of the Learning and Eloquence of these Orthodox Fathers to confound Heresies is they did arise up in the World It the Hereticks with their little learning did wrest some places of Scripture these Hero's did rectifie such abused places by which they both baffled their Adversaries and confirmed the Truth So that the Heretick got as little by those attempts as Ellwood has by this Allegation Which gives us but an opportunity to set an higher value upon Learning seeing God has been pleased to use it as a means to secure His Holy Word in times of old but to go on We may observe that when by the furious inundation of the barbarous Nations into the Roman Empire Learning fell into decay and when Arts and Sciences were discouraged and neglected at the same time all manner of Corruptions crept into the Church and as ignorance encreased Errors multiplied So that most of the present evil opinions of the Church of Rome had their original in those Unlearned Ages from about 700 years 〈◊〉 Christ till about 〈◊〉 after About the Midnight of which darkness there was scarce any Learning left in the World It is wonderful saith Sabellions what a General oblivion of Arts had seized on Mens minds These were the unhappy times which bred and nursed up Invocation of Saints Worship of Images Purgatory with all the Fanatical Visions and Revelations Miracles c. Then began Shrines Pilgrimages Reliques Purchasing of Pardons and the Popes attempts for an Universal Monarchy To serve which ends Scripture was wrested Fathers Councils and Records corrupted and forged while the World was a sleep and for want of Learning discerned not the Cheat which is now so gross and palpable And 't is well worth our Notice what the Learned Hottinger observes viz. That the Canon of the Council of Vienna Anno 1312. Commanding the study of the Oriental Languages in Europe was the happy dawning of the blessed Reformation For while ignorance overspread the World the Pope carried the Bell away and had it generally at his Devotion And Canus confesseth that their Doctors for 300 years together understood neither Greek nor Hebrew And Lelius Tifernus Anno 1470. had much ado to get leave to read Greek in the University of Paris for as Epenâ—…aeus tells us Com. ad 2 Tim. 3. In that Age to understand Greek was suspected and to have skill iâ—… Hebrew almost enough to make a Man accounted an Heretick In those times they could wrest Ecâ—… duo gladii and Deus fecit duo Luminaria to prove the Popâ—… above the Emperour But as soon as God restored Learning the Reformation immediately followed Which the wisest Papists foresaw Hence Platina relates that Pope Paul the second who lived about forty years before Luther was wont to Call all that studied humane Learning Hereticks frequently admonishing the Romans not to bring up their Children in Learning Hence that famous saying of Ludovicus Vives his Master to him which might very well fit the Mouth of George Fox The better Grammarian thou art the worse Divine thou wilt
to blame for inferring from thence a Necessity of Humane Learning in Ordinary times p. 226. Min. A more senseless remark cannot be made Unless Humane Learning had been an extraordinary thing and acquired only in an extraordinary manner Par However he saith that Teaching of the Spirit had no dependency upon Tongues it was before them and was to continue after them ibid. Min. This is false for they were given both at one time But if he mean that the Ordinary teaching of the Spirit was to continue after them I say as much But then his not distinguishing between the Ordinary and Extraordinary teaching of the Spirit has here run him into some gross Absurdities for two or three pages together First he supposes All Christian Believers to be the Apostles successors as if there were no difference between the Preacher and the Hearer between Priest and People when the Apostles selected their successors from out of the company of Ordinary Christians And the Distinction has been ever kept up in all Ages since Secondly The Quaker pleads alike for all Believers as if they had All the inward and immediate Teaching p. 229. and takes those places 1 Iohn 2. 20 27. Ye know all things and need not that any man teach you c. without Limitation Hence it follows that the Apostles taught in vain And so not only Ministers pains are in vain but the Quakers own Preachments for if All were are immediately taught what need was or is there of any of these Thirdly The Quaker seems to fancy that if the Spirit be not with Believers in this immediate Manner He is not with them at all p. 230. and that Christ hath left His people comfortless as if the people in Canaan where they plowed and sowed were not fed by Gods Providence as well as in the Wilderness We know that it is the Spirit that blesseth our Learning and to as useful purposes considering our Circumstances as if we had that Immediate Teaching which the Quakers do but dream of Par. He would make his Reader believe that you are of opinion that the Apostles received the knowledge of the Gospel by Tongues p. 231. Min. He wrongs me infinitely I put in Miracles and the rest Immediate knowledge and Tongues are by me usually reckoned together because the Apostles received them together and they were Miraculous effects of the Spirit both temporary and extraordinary and both fitted to that Season And Immediate Teaching is as little to be expected now as the Gift of Tongues which was not so Miraculous as immediate teaching it being a greater wonder that ignorant men should be acquainted with All Heavenly Truthes as speak All Earthly Languages Methinks when Quakers talk of this Immediate Teaching it 's as some do of the Philosophers Stone for while they boast of it they should shew us One man that Actually hath it And for all their pretences we see some of them do not depend upon it but make use of Humane Means and do read and study and when they falsly quote an Author can pretend they were in the Countrey c. And we all know that the Quakers being generally devoid of Learning their discourses and writings are fuller of tautologies soloecisms confusion and darkness than any other sort of people whatsoever Whereas if they had the Immediate teaching as the Apostles had their Notions would be clear their discourses Methodical and Argumentative as those of the Apostles were And wee see they are so far from it that even T. E. a pretender to Learning as well as to this inspiration is often detected of gross ignorance impertinence and self-contradiction in this little Tract All the Knowledge therefore that we expect now must be attain'd only by Gods blessing upon our due use of Means 'T is certain that the best Quaker of them all did he not read study converse c. would be as ignorant as a Barbarous Indian and till they can give us an example to the contrary this pretence of theirs must pass for an absolute imposture Par. But T. E. thinks that He has catch't you in a contradiction because you say that Necessary Truths are already Revealed in Scripture yet you confess that you want the Assistance of the Spirit to help you to understand them p. 236. Min. He forgets that here He do's contradict Himself Before I made humane Learning All in all now it seems I make the ordinary assistance of the Spirit Necessary But to the point If it be a contradiction to pray for the assistance of the Spirit for the understanding of what is Revealed Then is His Worship guilty of the same contradiction for he tells us p. 237 238. that the Doctrines contained in the Holy Scriptures cannot be comprehended or understood by the Wit and Wisdom of man in his highest Natural attainments but only and alone by the Openings and Discoveries of that holy Spirit by which they were at first Revealed So that I must retort his own words * If it cannot be understood it 's not Revealed but Vailed My wonder is that this Quaker quarrels not with the last book in Scripture seeing it's the hardest to be understood yet called The Revelation of Iesus Christ. And I must tell the Quaker that whatsoever is made publick is revealed whether every body understand it or no. Par. As for New Revelations he thinks it is a phrase of your own not used by them p. 237. Min. 'T is well known that I am not the inventer of it And though T. E. disowns the phrase yet you see he defends the thing and if we must not call them New Revelations we must then call them New Impostures Have not divers Quakers stript themselves stark naked and said the Spirit bid them deliver such and such a Message in that posture Must not then this be a New Revelation in their own sense I shall be glad to hear that all Quakers were really become as their Champion Ellwood pretends they are of another mind It would be very well would they at last renounce all revelations which are not contained in the Scripture and search out the sense of what is already Revealed which they may do with the ordinary assistance of Gods Spirit and His blessing on the use of means so far as is needful to their own Salvation Thus far I shall agree with T. E. that Outward means without the Spirit of God will not make us savingly to understand the Scriptures Provided that he will add that the Spirit will not help those who neglect to use the means so far as their condition and capacity do extend unto Now as for those that expect New Revelations or immediate Teaching that is a Teaching without means such do render the Scriptures useless altogether For he that hath immediately the same Truthes from the same fountain from whenee the Scriptures do flow will not value the Scriptures at all for who will value a Copy that hath the
Answer to an Exchequer Bill and very formally too put off their Hats and kiss'd the Book The late Bishop of Lincoln being either as Plaintiff or Defendant concern'd in a Chancery Suit a Quaker at a Commission came very formally to swear against him One of the Commissioners from whom I had the account ask't him How it came to pass that he being a Quaker would swear He told him Thou knowest that among Huntsmen it was never thought amiss to kill a Fox or Badger by any means such being allowed no fair play c. leaving it to himself to make the application You see then that it 's lawful to go to Law in civil Cases to ingage others to swear and sometimes to swear themselves As it interest and envy ought to take place though contrary to the Principles and Honour of Christianity God knows I mention none of these things out of any envious Principle but to discover to the Quakers the danger that they are in From which Good God deliver them for His blessed Names sake Amen The Conclusion Par. IN the conclusion of T. E's Book having first falsly told His Reader that He had given a particular Answer to the most material passages in yours He gives you a warning from writing any more against the Quakers for if you do you may expect him on your Bones again For He saith that He no way doubts but that the Lord will enable him or some of his Servants to vindicate his truth p. 363. Min. God no doubt will take care of his truth but if He enable T. E. to write we may be confident that it will be a Recantation of what he hath already writ However let not him think that his idle Threats will discourage me in duty of doing good Par. His main Business here is to present His Reader with a collection of some of your Phrases which He calls Virulent Expressions and which He saith your Academical Education hath bestowed upon you p. 364. Min. Whether my Expressions were Virulent or no This I am sure here 's a foul and impudent Slander in charging my Academical Education therewith but wherein do's this Virulency appear Par. His first Instance is this the Spirit of Quakerism and the Delusions of it ibid. Min. This mind 's me of an old Woman who corrected Her Maid for swearing because She call'd a Hen a Jade Is not the Quaker think you sadly put to 't when for want of matter He falls upon such innocent expressions as these I must confess I could not forbear smiling when I found not only a Fanatical Iesuit for a woful bitter expression but the whim in the pate put into his Catologue Pray do you remember upon what account it was spoken Par. Yes For to vindicate Scripture from the idle fancies of some You supposed a Man troubled with a Vertigo in his Head should say he was confident the Earth turned round you askt whether it was the Earth or the Distemper in the Brain that occasioned that misapprehension so said you every Fanatick will tell you that he has the Scripture on his side in behalf of his opinions where is the fault in the Scripture or in the Whim in his Pate Min. You see then how that expression concern'd all Fanaticks in general and is it not very pleasant that to prove me virulent He should take Fanatick to himself and Party Par. You said the Quakers were Cheats and Impastors ibid. Min. It s true I said it but not before I first plainly proved it You know the Quakers pretend to immediate Teaching and that they speak and write by the infallible dictates of the Spirit of God if so then must all their works be as authentick and of equal Authority with the Scriptures themselves Now having discovered their gross ignorance in the interpretation and applicacation of that saying of Ieremiah The Priests hear rule by their means How could I be true to the Souls of Men in saying less Had T. E. clear'd his Brethren from the imposture He had effectually convicted me of virulency But he is so farr from clearing them in this point though their credit lay at stake that he sneaks off without taking any notice of it as was observed before Should I forwarn a Traveller from coming in such place and tell him that the People there are Thieves and Robbers if they were honest Men or I know nothing to the contrary my fault would be very heinous But if I knew them to be such it would be a breach of Justice and Charity to hide it from the Traveller Alas what I said of the Quakers were not bitter expressions but so many sad and serious truths and spoken out of a Principle of the truest charity and kindness to prevent their running headlong into eternal ruine and destruction But if no such expressions can proceed but from a malevolent crusty waspish and virulent Principle then let me ask my Friend Ellwood whether there is not such a People in the World who use to call Ministers Dumb dogs Hirelings Serpents Baals Priests and what not If he will be pleased to consult the works of His weighty Friend Hubberthorn He may there collect a large Catalogue indeed of expressions truly virulent and bitter Or let me tell him of another whose memory I suppose is much dearer to him I mean Ed. Burroughs who in his Works hath these expressions Reprobate Child of darkness a Stranger to the Life in the Sorcery and Witchcraft Dragon Diviner and many more such like He that had seen no more of T. E's Book than the Conclusion would at the first blush take him for such a gentle sweet and humble Quaker that one would imagine that the Royal Society had been trying some Experiment upon him and that they had taken out the very Splene out of his Side If this be so in truth Those Gentlemen must excuse me if I tell them in plain terms that they have proved themselves no good Artists in that they have left the main matter behind Therefore I shall give you some of his expressions and do you judge whether they be Virulent or no The Author of that book partly through Ignorance but principally through Envy in the first page of his Preface Ay but might the Parishioner have said He told me that I must not be covetous yet of all my acquaintance I know none more Covetous than He He told me I must not be drunk yet have I seen him so often He told me I must live chastly yet He himself was incontinent and so he goes on p. 23. The whole Book shews him big with envie p. 25. Bishop Gauden was as hold and no less blind than himself p 171. His envie and evil nature p. 210. My greedy Adversary p. 286. This Priest like a saucy and unthankful Son p. 279. And when the merciless Priest comes p. 347. To omit divers others in this very conclusion This Mans malevolent Tongue So that I shall not
And Dio. cap. 37. †Joseph Antiq. lib. 16. c. 6. Mark 11. 16. * Tract Mass. Jevamot c. 1. 1 Tim. 4. 4 5. †Nec Cibi sumantur nisi Oratione praemisiâ nec â—…ecedatur à mensâ nisi referatur Creatori gratia Hieron Ep. 22. ad Eustoch Tert. Apolog. cap 39. Which arose first from a Iewish Tradition Talm. tract Berach cap. 1 c. ‖ See Drus. Quaesl Heb. l. 3. Joâ—… 14. 26. * According to those Scriptures T. E. quotes 2 Cor. 5. 17. Rom. 2 28 29. Joh. 4. 21 22 23 c. Job 32. 4. †See Title of his third Chapter †Nulla Universitas potest subsistere nisi eam Ordo servet sustinear Bodin de Re pub l. 3. Ex Talmud Exercit Evang lib. 1. cap. 24. Rom. 12. 21. Gal. 5. 13. * Hexamer Hom. 9. * Herod in Polymn Sen. de Consul Si Nomen non occurrit Dominos salutamus Sen. 2 Joh. v. 1. * Neque enim ab ejusmodi honestis Titulis Christiana Religio abhorret quatenus quidem justum ac fas est Perinde est igitur ac si scriptum esset Eximiae ac praestanti dignitate Dominae * Aug. in Ps. 99. †Ambr. de Sacram lib. 6. c. 5. See also Tertul. de Orat. 132. August de Temp. Seâ—…m 126. Mat. 9. 12. 2 Sam. 12. 13. * p. 115. Constir Exercit. * Ovid. †p. 68. Serm 1. in Septuages * p. 53. †Rom. 11. 20. * Tert. de poenit Epiph. haer 31. Anno. 193. Haeres 59 Anno 440. Epist. 89. Aug. de perfec Instit. Edit Eâ—…asin Tom. 7. 2 Pet. 3. 18. 1 Thess. 4. 1 c. * Ps. 106. 16. Luke 6. 36. Conf. p. 31. Causin parab hist. l. 2. c. 14. Arist. Phys lib. 3. Bern. Epist. Job 7. 21. Corcâ—…l Milevitan Can. 7. Conc. Milevit Can. 6. Lact. Inst. l. 5. cap. 2. â—…an 6. Constir Apost l. 7. c. 25. Aâ—…g â—…om 42. Terr adv Prax. Cap. 10. Prov. 4. 23. Mat. 26. 41. In Psal. 19. * Sunt quaedam non humanae simpliciter naturae sed huic nunc inevitabilia ob Corporis concretionem in animam transeuntem aut adultam consuetudinem c. Grot. de jore belli l. 2. c. 20. †Bonum non nisi ex integro malum ex qualibet parte See Hubberthorn's Works Printed together Conf. p. 61. Jer. 4. 2. Lact. de sal sap cap. 20. Apolog. cap. 32. * De juram praesec 1. §. 2 †In Rom. 9. 1. ‖ Loci com de Lege Dei Conf. p. 59. Omni autem in re consensus omnium gentium lex naturae putanda est Cic. Tusc. qu. lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heraclitus See Grotius de jure bel and pa. l. 1. c. 1. p. 12. Ser. p. 369. Conf. p. 60. * Liv. l. 1. and l. 21. †Aâ—…ex ab Al. lib. 5. c. 10. In vit sol p. 40. †1 Sam. 15. 22. Vit. Soloâ—…is Simplic proaem Comment Lib. 1. cap. 16. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plato de legibus lib. 11. p. 917. †Diog. Laer. vit p. 191. collarcum Alex ab Al. l. 1. cap. 20. in fine †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De legib lib. 12. p. 948. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ibid. p. 949. * Alex. ab Alex. lib. 5. cap. 10. †Stat. 21. H. 8. 15. ‖ Aul. Gell. lib. 10. cap. 15. †Ea pictate omnium pectora imbuerat ut Fides ac Jusjurandum propulso legum ac paenarum meru civitatem regerent Liv. hist. lib. 1. Dec. 1. * Alex. ab Al. lib. 5. c. 10. †Clem. Alex. protrept ‖ Solinus de Scythis * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrvsost in Oratione Christum Deum esse †Persae Medi Indi Aethiopescum matribâ—…s aviis cum filiabus neptibus copulantur Hieron in Jovin lib. 2. ‖ Plutarch in vit Lycurgi * Plut. in vit Maâ—…ii †Semedo hist. Chin. p. 18. ‖ Jo. Plano Carpinilib hist. de Tartar cap. 3. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Andron Rbodius Conf. p. 57. Ex malis moribus bonae nas cuntur leges †Conf. p. 61. †Orat pro Themist †Conf p. 62. ‖ Fronti nulla fider Ego dixi inter fugiendum Chald. Paraphr †Aug. Hieron Epis. 28. ‖ Lib. 1. Ep. 107. ad Tim. Lector * Opinor Christum simpliciter sensisse perfectis nam de his loquitur Omnino non esse jurandum pro rebus hisce pro quibus vulgus dejerat Alioqui in causa fidei aut Pietatis etiam Christus Apostoli jurant Eras. Annot. in Mat. 5. 37. †Hac autem ratione multarum questionum nodi dissolvi poterunt si intelligamus Christum non simpliciter haec vetuisse sed veruisse eo more fieri quo vulgato more hominum fiebant Sic vetuit irasci sic vetuit salutare quenquam in viâ sic vetuit ditescere sic vtuit resistere malo sic vetuit appellari Magistros sic vetuit vocare Patrem in terrâ—…s id ibid. †L. quoniam c. de festib Vid. Heersback Christian. Jurispr in g. Praecept p. 261. Decret Gregor l. 2. Tit. 25. cap. 1. * Conf. p. 62 63. * Oturpem humani generis fraudis ac requitiae publicae confessionem Annulis nosiris plus quà m animis creditur Sen. de benef l. 3. c. 15. * Nihil Deo gratinâ—… 〈◊〉 possuâ—… quam jure 〈◊〉 Aug. in Ps. 19. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * 〈◊〉 Conf. p. 〈◊〉 †Conf. †pag. 56. Falsum loqui non potest qui non loquitur sic pejerare non potest qui non jurat Aug. in Serm. Dom. in Mont. lib. 1. p. 1123. Juramentum vanum est quando quis jurat non necessaria de causa falsum quando pejerat †Aug. in Galat. ‖ ib. ibid. * Rom. 1. 9. Juret qui adhibet Deum testem Aug. de Serm. Dom. in Mont. l. 2. p. 〈◊〉 124. and in Psal. 109. †Chryl Hâ—…mi 11 Act. 9. ‖ See p. 160. Concil Berkhamsted cap. 18. Spelm. Anno. 700. †See T. E. 4 5. 46. 2 Cor. 11. Gal 1. 7. ‖ Serm. 30. de verb. Apest. See Fr. Conf. p. 77 78. See Fr. Conf. p. 84. †Aug. de verb. Apost Ser. 30. ‖ See p. 46. See Fr. Conf. p. 70 71. †See his Chronelogy †Aug. verb. Apost Ser. 28 30. ‖ Citat hunc locum Augustinus Epist 89. Rursum copiosius Serm. de verb. Apost 28. ostendens hoc loco jurasse Paulum idqque liquete ex Graecis exemplaribus Nec est quod tergiversemur negemus Apostolum jurasle quum alibi non paucis locis palam juret Erasm. Annot. in 1 Cor. 15. 31. * S. Ambr. in loc * Aug. de Verb. Apost Ser. 130. Vatab. in loc Pag. 156 and 163. 〈◊〉 See Turkish Hist. p. 284. Mat. 5. 10. Psal. 139. Fr. Conf. p. 68. Numb 22. 38. Mat. 16. 28. Confer p. 74. Orig. cont Cels. l. 7. * Omnino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. per ullam rem Creatam ut apparet ex proxime sequentibus quas Christus damnat formulis Ex quibus liquet indirectas jurandi species non ipsum jusjurandum legitimè conceptum â—…eprehendi ac proinde â—…niversalem particulam à nonnullis temere hoc loco â—…rgeri Beza Annot. in loc * This T. E. himself grants p. 141 c. †Aug. in ver Ap. Serm. 30. * Gen. 24. †ver 2. ‖ Gen. 18. 19. * Sed te nos facimus fortuna Dâ—…am Caelóque locamus Juven Sat. 10. †Orig. cont Cel. l. 8. Edit Cant. p. 421. ‖ Tert. Apol. cap. 32. ‖ Lib. 4. 〈◊〉 15. †Cent. Magdâ—…burg Cent. 3. c. 6. ‖ Eus. l. 6. c. 4 5. †Eus. de vit Constant lib. 1. cap. 22. * Orig. in Cels. l. 7. †Bevereg Pandect Tom. 2. Canon Sâ—… Basil ad Amphiloc Opera Greg. Naz. Vol. 2. Iamb 20 p. 224. Edit Paris †Ibid. Carmen 17. p 92. et Joh. 1. 1. ‖ Billius Annot. on the Poem * 1 Cor. il 1. †Psal. 119. 106. ‖ Naz. Orat. 32. * See p. 189. ‖ Ad pop Antioc Hom. 5. 16. Hom. de juram ‖ Hom. 11. ad Heb. * Heb. 6. 16. Rev. 3. 14. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * See Grotius on Mat. 26. 63. * Ad Paulin Ep. 153. et Ad Eustâ—…ch Epiâ—… 22. †Ad Eustoch Ep. 22. * Comment in Mat. 5. ‖ Holy Dying Chap. 4. §. 8. p. 164. * Stromat 7. †Lib. 7. c. 4. ‖ Apolog Cap. 32. * Athan. in Passion et Crucem Dom. †In Psal. 118. Serm. 14. Veget. instit rei militar Fr. Conf. p. 86. †De verb. Apost Luk. 24. 45. 2 Tim 2. 18. †Preface to his Book †Printed Anno Dom. 1663. Principles of the Quakers p. 51. * Ennead 9. lib. 1. †Luke 22. 38. ‖ Gen. 1. â—…6 Vives de Causis lib. 2. * De rat Stud. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 19. ‖ 1. Cor. 14. See Fr. Conf. p. 100. 1. Absurd 2. Absurd 3. Absurd p. 236. Rev 1. 1 * G. Batemans Anto Mr. Legard p. 21. See Jewels Treatise of the H. Scriptures p. 36 and the First part of his defence c. p. 62 63 65. Foxâ—… Martyrol Vol. 3 p. 376. * Propriis peâ—…nis configâ—… m 〈◊〉 ex â—…st is enim li bâ—…s arma capinnt c. Theodor l. 3. c. 8. †Hist. Tripâ—…rt lib. 6. c. 17. ‖ De doct Chr. lib. 2. c. 40. * Hieron Ep. 4. †ibid. ‖ â—…ee Ep. 8. p. 76. Conf. p. 132 133. Gen. 12. 7. Jos. 7. 19 p. 135. Acts 20. 35. 1 Cor. 9. Gal. 6. 6. p. 151 c. Jer. 5. 31. 1. Kings 15. 14. Rom. 2. Dolus latet in ge neralibus Martyr 2. vol. p. 602 603 Mart. 1. vol. p. 583 * p. 605. 1. vol. p. 607. ibid. p. 620. p. 633. p. 653. p. 654. p. 669. p. 708. Sir Edwin Sandys s Survey sect 39. †Herberts Travels into Africa and Asiâ—… p. 31. Acts 5. 4. p. 21. Exod. 32. 4. Da decimas in hoc ditescas A Jewish Proverb pag. 347. Rom. 13 1. 4. Conf. p. 95 96. p. 29. 32.
and what property the Quakers have in this Excellent Martyr Bonner taunting him as an Anabaptist and as one that denyed the Lawfulness of Swearing before a Judge he replyed thus My Lord I am no Anabaptist I think it LAWFVLL TO SWEAR before a Competent Iudge He being accused by the said Bonner before one of the Sheriffs of London that he denyed Baptism to be necessary to them that were born of Christian Parents and that he denyed Fasting and Prayer c. smartly answer'd to this slander Is not your Lordship ashamed to say before this Worshipfull Gentleman that I maintain these abominable Blasphemies which you have rehearsed So that you see to deny the Ordinance of Baptism as the Quakers do in the judgment of the Learned Philpot is an abominable Blasphemy And in vindication of Infant Baptism He has writ a very learned Tract never to be Answer'd And concerning the other Sacrament of the Lord's Supper At a Conference with several of the Nobility he said thus I do protest to your Honours that I think as reverently of the Sacrament as a Christian man ought to do and that I acknowledg the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ ministred after Christ's Institution to be one of the greatest Treasures and comforts that he left us in the earth And being required by the Arch-Bishop of York to give a definition of the Church he gave it thus It is a Congregation of people dispersed thorow the world agreeing together in the word of God using the Sacraments and all other things according to the same So then those that deny the use of the holy Sacraments and consequently the Quakers who do so are according to this Pious Martyr no members of the Church of Christ. Bradford whom Ellwood styles an Eminent Martyr p. 275. in a Conference with the Arch-Bishop of York and the Bishop of Chichester would not by both their entreaties be moved to sit in their presence neither would he be perswaded to put on his Cap till they overcame him by their great importunity The same Bradford chargeth the Papists with Sacrilege in robbing the Laity of Christ's Cup in the Sacrament Now if he were living of how great Sacrilege would he accuse the Quakers who not only take away the Cup but utterly deny both the Sacraments And herein are the Quakers far worse than the Papists Again as to his Judgment of an Oath In a certain Conference he says thus I was thrice Sworn in Cambridg when I was admitted Master of Arts when I was admitted Fellow of Pembrook Hall and when I was there the Visiters came thither and Sware the University Again I was Sworn when I enter'd into the Ministry when I had a Prebend given me and I was Sworn to serve the King a little before his Death Tush Herod's Oaths quoth the Chancellor a man should make no Conscience at But My Lord said Bradford these were no Herod's Oaths no Unlawful Oaths but OATHS ACCORDING TO GOD's WORD as you your self have well affirmed in your book De verâ obedientiâ Do but compare his Letters Recorded by Fox with Ellwood's Chapter of Confession and see whether Light and Darkness can be more contrary Taylor speaking of the Common Prayer-Book gives this character of it There was says he set forth by the innocent King Edward the whole Church-Service with great deliberation and the advice of the best learned men in the Realm and Authorized by the whole Parliament and receiv'd and publish'd gladly by the whole Realm which book was never reformed but once and yet by that one reformation it was so fully perfected according to the Rules of our Christian Religion in every behalf that no Christian Conscience could be offended with anything therein contained I mean of that book reformed And the Common Prayer-Book was the last Present he made to his Wife and that which he used also during his inprisonment This may satisfy you that this Godly Martyr was no Quaker Of an Oath you may see his opinion where he saith The Oath against the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome was a LAWFULL OATH and so was the Oath made by us all touching the King's or Queen's Preheminence Par. I perceive after all this that all those excellent men whom he acknowledges Godly Martyrs were of the Church of England Min. Did you ever doubt it Surely it was never questioned till this Quaker invaded our Right in them Par. But how do you prove your other Particular that they held the afore-mention'd Document to be eternal Min. First you shall hear what Latimer saith As long as they minister the word of God or his Sacraments or any thing that God hath Ordained to the Salvation of Mankind wherewith God hath promised to be present to work with the Ministration of the same to the end of the world They be to be heard to be obeyed to be honoured for God's Ordinance sake which is Effectual and Fruitful whatsoever the Minister is though he be a Devil c. And he cites Origen and Chrysostom as of the same opinion Hear also what the Learned Philpot saith to this Point He being engaged in a Disputation with the Arch-Bishop of York and being asked what the opinion of the Donatists was replyed That they were a certain sect of men affirming among other Heresies that the Dignity of the Sacraments depended on the Worthiness of the Minister so that if the Minister was Good the Sacraments which be Ministred were available or else not Here you may infer that this tenent of Ellwood's in the opinion of this holy Martyr is no less than Heresy And you may know too from whence both he and his Brethren had it even from the long since exploded Donatists At another Disputation with the Bishop of Worcester and others He told the Bishop that he knew Rome To this the Bishop answer'd that he was sorry that he had been there for he supposed the wickedness which he saw there made him do as he did Philpot replyed No My Lord I do not do as I do for that cause for I am taught otherwise by the Gospel not altogether to refuse the Minister for his evil living so that he bring sound Doctrine out of God's Book Par. I wonder why you take no notice of Tindall whom T. E. calls a faithful Martyr p. 275. Min. I shall give you two or three instances whereby you may understand his Principels were far from Quakerism In a supplication to the King and Estates he exhorts the Lords Temporal that they would fall before the King's Grace and would humbly desire his Majesty to suffer it to be tryed who of right ought to succeed c. And that all the Lords Temporal be SWORN thereto c. Next I find this Confession of his We be all Sinners an hundred times greater than all that we suffer And in one of his Letters he gives advice