the â—ight within that that would have saved them according to G. Whitehead's Divinity without any other Baptisme outward or inward that the Apostles could Administer unto them SECT II. Next as to his second Argument from that in Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved these words do not prove that this was not Baptisme with Water for its a true Assertion he that believes and is Baptized with Water shall be saved but it will not prove that therefore Baptisme with Water is of absolute necessity to Salvation the most it proveth is that Baptisme with Water when and where it can be duly had is a means of Salvation as outward Hearing and Reading in the Holy Scriptures are means of Salvation yet not of such absolute necessity but that Men may be saved without them even as it may be truly said he that believeth and frequenteth the Meetings of the Faithful shall be saved and yet in divers Cases Men may be saved without frequenting such Meetings as when they are hindred by Sickness or Imprisonment or some other Restraint as when living in a Country where no such Meetings are to be found and that the Baptisme mentioned Mark 16. is not that which is of absolute necessity to Salvation is evident from the following Words where the word Baptized is omitted for Christ did not say he that is not baptized shall be damned but he that believeth not shall be damned the varying of the Expression sufficiently proveth that he did not mean the inward Baptisme but the outward and whereas not G. Whitehead but W. Penn and R. Barclay argue from the Particle in Greek that signifieth in English into that therefore it must be the Baptisme with the Spirit it is indeed very weakly and fallaciously argued for the same Greek Particle is found Acts 8.16 where it is said that these of Samaria who were Baptized into the Name of the Lord Jesus had not received the Holy Ghost when so Baptized till for some time after that Peter and John came unto them the Greek Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same here and in Matth. 28.19 And any who have but a little skill in Greek know that the Greek Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath often the same signification with the Greek Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifieth as well in as into so that their so arguing is built on a Grammatical Quibble that is altogether groundless And for them to argue that it was not Water-Baptisme which Christ commanded to the Apostles Matth. 28.19 because of the words Baptizing into the name c. with as much colour of reason they might argue that when in James 5.14 It is said anointing them with Oyl in the name of the Lord that the anointing there meant was not an outward anointing but an inward and that the Oyl was not outward but inward Again whereas G.W. saith on this second Argument for the Saints were saved by that Baptisme which was not the putting away the filth of the Flesh but the answer of a good Conscience 1. Pet. 3.21 Therefore it was not Water-Baptisme which Christ commanded in Matth. 28. c. I answer that doth no wise follow that therefore it was not Water-Baptisme SECT III. AND because I find that Robert Barclay in that Chapter of his Printed Apology reprinted by his Son Robert Barclay at London 1696 doth much insist upon this place in Peter as if it did effectually prove that Water-Baptisme is no Gospel Institution and it is a common Text the Teachers among the Quakers bring to oppose Baptisme with Water therefore I think fit the more fully to examine the Arguments brought by him from this place against it But in the first place I do apologize for my medling to answer or correct any Passages in the Books of R. Barclay whom as I did greatly love and esteem and who I believe was one of the foundest Writers among the People called Quakers so I do truly honour his memory believing that as to the main he was a true Christian though in divers things he was byassed and misled as I also was by the too great esteem that he had and too great credit he gave as I also did of those called his Elders whose gross perversions and misinterpretations of Holy Scripture we both did upon their Authority take for Divine Inspirations and I hope it may be a just Apology to me and defence against the injurious Clamours of some that may and will object it against me as a breach of Friendship to censure or correct any thing of that my deceased Friend That I do no otherwise in this Case than I would be done by for if after my decease as well as before any Friend of mine should censure and correct any Passages in any Books of mine that did justly need such Censure and Correction I and all that love me should take it as a true act of Friendship it being the best way to cover the Faults of our Friends or were it of our Parents to correct them and though Men may be dear to us yet Truth ought to be more dear nor do I thus censuring and correcting what I judge amiss in R.B. on these Heads do any more wrong to him than I do to my self whom I have impartially censured and now again do freely declaring whatever I have said or writ any where against Baptisme with Water and the Outward Supper as being no Gospel Institution was erronious and which therefore I retract and correct And where I have used divers of the same Arguments which G.W. and R.B. hath used which I find R.B. hath been more large upon than I have any where been in any of my Books therefore I shall rather consider these Arguments as brought by him than by me especially for this cause that he is jugded by many of the Quakers to have writ more forcibly against these matters than most have or then I have done R.B. thus argueth from 1 Pet. 3.21 see pag. 16. of his Sons Edition called Baptisme and the Supper substantially asserted The Apostle saith he tells us first negatively what it is not viz. not a putting away of the filth of the Flesh then surely it is not a washing with Water since that is so Answer That the Baptisme there described is not a putting away the filth of the Flesh is granted but it doth not follow that therefore it is not Water-Baptisme for though ordinary washing with Water is a doing away Bodily filthiness yet Baptisme with Water is not not ever was nay not John's Baptisme with Water for John did not say that he baptized his Disciples to wash away the filth of their Bodies but unto Repentance The description of Baptisme here given by Peter is taken from the end as is very common both in Scripture and elsewhere to describe a thing from its end now the end of Water-Baptisme as it was commanded by Christ Matth. 28.19 was not to put away
Whitehead in the very first instant art of Baptizing they confessed their Sins and neither before nor after But that there was a Divine and Spiritual Baptisme that attended their Ministry to some will not prove that they did Baptize them with the Divine and Spiritual Baptisme which was the Work of God and of Christ and promised by Christ to the Apostles and other Believers but was never commanded them to give it to others His Third Argument is from Gal. 3.2 Received ye the spirit by the works of the law or by hearing of faith c. he therefore that ministreth to you the spirit and worketh miracles among you doth he it by the works of the law or by the preaching of faith Ans He taketh it for granted that by him that worketh Miracles among them and Ministreth the Spirit unto them is to be understood Paul or some other Man by whom they were Converted But Paul it could not be for the words being in the Present Tense implyeth a present Ministration of the Spirit when Paul wrote that Epistle unto them but Paul was then at Rome as the end of the Epistle sheweth nor was it any other Man because they were already Converted and had received the Spirit before he writ that Epistle unto them Therefore it is most proper to understand this he to be Christ who is the only furnisher and supplyer of the Spirit together with God unto the Faithful the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred Prebens Suppeditans by Pasor and doth properly signifie the Principal Efficient from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dux chori the Captain of the Chorus but this is Christ who supplyeth and giveth the Spirit to the Saints and neither Paul nor any other Man And that the Apostles were Ministers of the Spirit doth not signifie that they gave the Spirit or Baptized with the Spirit but that they were assisted and guided by the Spirit in their Ministry and that God accompanied their Ministry with his not their giving the Spirit unto such who believed their Doctrine SECT V. I Proceed in the next place to examine all the other Arguments I find used by W. Penn and R. Barclay against these Divine Institutions that seem to have any shadow of weight The First Argument I find used by W. Penn in his Reason against Railing in p. 107. is first saith he we know and they confess that they were in the beginning used as Figures and Shadows of a more hidden and Spiritual Substance 2. That they were to endure no longer than till the Substance was come Now the time of the Baptisme of the Holy Ghost Christ's only Baptisme therefore called the one Baptisme has been long since come consequently the other which was John 's was fulfilled and as becomes a forerunner ought to cease the like may be said of the Bread and Wine for as there is but one Baptisme so there is but one Bread This same Argument for Matter but in different words is used by R.B. in the above said Treatise p. 7.8 Answ The Conclusion they both draw viz. that John's Baptisme is ceased may be granted and yet it will not follow that Water-Baptisme as it was practised by the Apostles and other Ministers after Christ's Resurrection and Ascension is ceased seeing there is great ground to distinguish betwixt John's water-Baptisme and the Apostles in divers weighty respects as first the Man Christ after he rose from the Dead having all Power given him in Heaven and in Earth Commissioned the Apostles to Baptize and that with Water as shall be afterwards proved more fully but John had not his Commission from the Man Christ c. 2. John did only Baptize them of his own Nation and was only sent to Israel but the Apostles Commission reached to all Nations 3. John though he taught them to believe in him who was to come to wit Christ yet he required not Faith in Christ as any condition to qualifie his Disciples to receive his Baptisme but the Apostles required Faith in Christ Jesus in all the Men and Women as a condition qualifying them to receive their Baptisme 4. We do not find that the Holy Ghost was given or promised to them who received John's Baptisme but the promise of the Holy Ghost was given to such as did duly and worthily receive the Apostles Baptisme therefore John's Baptisme was called the Baptisme of Repentance 5. It seems greatly probable that some who had received John's Baptisme were again Baptized with the Apostles Baptisme Acts 19.3.4 5 6. But whereas they both argue from John's Words I must decrease but he must increase it hath a further understanding than barely as in relation to John's Baptisme for it is said John 4.12 that Jesus made and Baptized more Disciples than John tho' Jesus himself Baptized not but his Disciples thus John decreased and Christ increased when both Water-Baptismes were in force that Christ had more Disciples than John even when John was living at which he rejoyced and as the number of Christ's Disciples increased above the number of Johns before John's decease so still after and will encrease and so will the Glory and Honour of Christ encrease above John to the end of the World But whereas they both argue as they think so strongly both against Water-Baptisme and the outward Supper because of the Scripture Phrase one Baptisme and one Bread which I confess did formerly carry some weight with me and I have so argued in some of my former Books but I have sufficiently seen the weakness of that Argument as well as other Arguments brought both by them and me against these Divine Institutions But let it be considered how things are said to be one in divers senses and acceptations God is one in the highest sense yet this doth not infer that there is no distinction of the Father Son and Holy Ghost in their relative Properties which are incommunicable and Christ is one and yet this doth not prove that Christ hath not two Natures one of the Godhead another of the Manhood most gloriously united 3. Faith is one yet there are divers true significations of Faith in Scripture as 1. the saving Faith 2. the Faith of Miracles which every one had not who had the saving Faith 3. Faith objectively taken for the Doctrine of Faith either as it is outwardly Preached or Professed as in Rom. 1.5 Gal. 3.2 Acts 24.24 Now if one should argue because the Scripture saith there is one Faith Eph. 4.5 that consequently there is but one Faith and that is the Doctrine of Faith outwardly Preached and Professed and consequently deny Faith as it is an inward Grace and Virtue of the Spirit in the Hearts of true Believers his Argument would be false so on the other hand if another should argue true saving Faith that is of absolute necessity to Salvation is an inward Grace or Vertue of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of true Believers and therefore there is no Doctrine of Faith to be Preached or Professed his Argument should be also false and as false is this way of reasoning that because the Baptisme is one therefore that one Baptisme is only the inward of the Spirit excluding
the outward Baptisme of Water or as to say therefore it is only the outward Baptisme of Water excluding the inward Baptisme of the Spirit Now as the one Faith mentioned Ephes 4.5 Suppose is meant the inward Grace or Virtue of Faith in the hearts of all True Believers doth not exclude the Doctrine of Faith outwardly Preached and Professed so nor doth the inward Baptisme of the Spirit suppose there meant Eph. 4.5 exclude the outward Baptisme of Water both being true and one in their kind as the inward Grace of Faith is specifically one in all true Believers but numerically manifold even as manifold as there are numbers of Believers so the Doctrine of Faith is one in its kind though consisting of many parts therefore to argue as W. Penn doth that Baptisme is one in the same sense as God is one is very inconsiderate which would infer that though God is one in specie yet that there are as many Gods numerically as Believers And notwithstanding that in Ephes 4.5 it is said there is one Baptisme yet it is not said there or elsewhere that there is but one Baptisme for another place of Scripture mentions Baptismes in the Plural Number Heb. 6.2 And indeed as weak as their Argument against Water-Baptisme is from the Scripture words one Baptisme no less weak is their Argument against the outward Supper practised with Bread and Wine in commemoration of our Lord's Death because of the Scripture words one Bread 1 Cor. 10.17 for in that same verse Paul tells of one Bread in a very different signification even as far as the Church of Christ is not Christ we said he being many are one Bread but doth it therefore follow that there is no other Bread than the Church nay for they are all partakers of that one Bread which is Christ and there is a third Bread that he mentions in the same Chapter which is neither the one nor the other one Bread and that is the outward Bread that they did eat v. 16. the bread which we break is it not the Communion of the body of Christ Even as Christ said concerning the outward Bread that it was his Body to wit Figuratively so by the like Figure it was the Communion of his Body but not the Body it self which too many have been so foolish as to imagine that the outward Bread was Converted into Christ's real Body and as if Paul had foreseen that many would become so foolish and unwise as so to imagine therefore to caution against any such folly he had said I speak as to wise Men judge ye what I say But whereas many of the People called Quakers by Bread in that part of the Verse the Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Lord's Body Will have to be meant not the outward Elementary Bread but the Body of Christ it self in this they are under a great mistake for that would render the words to have a most absur'd Sense as to say the Body of Christ is the Communion of his Body but the Body is one thing and the Communion of that Body is another and it were as little sense to understand it thus the Body of Christ is a Figure of the Communion of his Body therefore the true sense of the words is the outward Bread which we break is a Figure or Sign of the Communion of the Lord's Body But these Men are under another great Mistake as if by the Lord's Body here were not meant his outward Body that was Crucified and Raised again but the Life which is the Light in them and in every Man whether Believer or Unbeliever But of this great Error I shall have occasion hereafter to take notice only at present let it be remembred that by the Body of Christ in these above-mentioned words is to be understood the Body of Christ that was outwardly Crucified Dyed and rose again and is a living Glorious Body which is the Body of the second Adam the quickning Spirit of the Virtue of which all true Believers partake and by their having the Communion of his Body whether when eating the outward Bread so that they eat with true Faith or when they do not eat yet believing for the Communion of his Body is not confined to the outward eating they have the Communion of his Spirit also and enjoy of the manifold Spiritual Blessings of Grace Life and Light sent and conveyed into their Hearts by and through the glorified Man Christ Jesus who hath a Glorified Body and though this Communion of Christ's Body is hard to be expressed or to be demonstrated to Man's reasonable understanding yet by Faith it is certainly felt and witnessed with the blessed Effects of it causing an encrease in Holiness and Divine Knowledge and Experience in all true Believers nor is there any thing in this Mystery or any other Mystery of the Christian Religion that is contradictory to our reasonable understanding But yet a little further to let them see the folly of that Argument from the Scripture Phrase one Baptisme and one Body when Paul saith Eph. 4.4 There is one Body and one Spirit it doth not bear this Sense as if the Church were but one numerical Body or one single Man or as if there were no Body of the Man Christ in Heaven though some of their Teachers have so falsely argued that because the Body of Christ is one therefore Christ has no Body but his Church and as false should their Arguing be there is but one Spirit and that Spirit is the Holy Ghost therefore the Man Christ hath no Soul or Spirit of Man in him and therefore Believers have no Spirits or Souls of Men in them that are Created Rational Spirits both which are most false and foolish consequences also when the Scripture saith there is one Father and one is your Father it would be a very false consequence to infer that therefore we have never had any outward or visible Fathers and as false a consequence it is from one invisible Baptisme of the Spirit to argue against any outward and visible Baptisme or from the outward visible Baptisme being one in its kind to argue against the invisible and inward Baptisme which is one in its kind also this is an Error called by Logicians a Transition from one kind to another as because there is one kind of Animal on Earth called a Dog therefore there was not any thing else so called whereas there is a Fish that hath the same Name as also a Star in Heaven SECT VI. BUT whereas W. Penn in his above mentioned Argument saith first we know and they confess that they were in the beginning used as Figures and Shadows of a more hidden Spiritual Substance Ans In this
was proper only to God and Christ why did John say he that comes after me shall Baptize with the Holy Ghost he did not say they who should come after me but he intimating none had that Power and Dignity but Christ who was God as well as Man and as he was God had this power belonging to him and which did belong to no Men nor Creature whatsoever and thus indeed the Baptisme with the Spirit is Christ's Baptisme not which he commanded Men to do but which he promised to do altho' the Water-Baptisme which he commanded his Apostles to practise in his Name is also his in a secondary sense as the Apostles teaching is his because commanded by him yet when we speak of Gods teaching according to the sense of that Scripture they shall all be taught of God it is not meant the outward teaching of Men but Gods inward teaching in Mens hearts As touching his third Reason to prove that Baptisme with the Holy Ghost is meant Matth. 28.19 The Baptisme which Christ commanded his Apostles was such that as many as were therewith baptized therewith did put on Christ but this is not true of Water-Baptisme Ans As concerning that place of Scripture Gal. 3.7 from which this Argument seems to be taken the place it self restricts it to the believing Galatians as v. 26. For yee are all the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus and all such as beings Baptized with outward Water put him on by a publick Profession so by true Faith they inwardly put him on To make a publick Profession of Christ by Baptisme of Water is to put him on in a common Phrase of speech as when a Man is said to put on the Souldier the Magistrate by putting on the Garment of a Souldier or Magistrate in which sense Jerome said Romae Christum indui i.e. at Rome I put on Christ signifying that he was there baptized and it is to be noticed how Paul generally in his Epistles to the Churches he wrot to calls them Saints they being so by profession though there might have been Hypocrites among them and as by outward profession Men are said to be Saints so they may be said to have put on Christ when nothing by Word or Deed can appear to the contrary in a judgment of Charity As to his 4th Argument that Baptisme with Water was John's Baptisme I have above shewn that John's Water-Baptisme and the Water-Baptisme commanded to and practised by the Apostles after Christ's Resurrection diflered in many respects and tho' both required Repentance as a condition in order to receive the Water-Baptisme yet the later required Faith in Christ Crucified and Raised again as a condition in order to receive Baptisme but the former did not require that Faith Again his arguing from their not using that form of Baptism In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost who did Baptize with Water in those days of the Apostles is as defective as his otherways of arguing on this Head But how doth he prove that they used not this Form Why because in all these places where Baptizing with Water is mentioned there is not a word of this Form and in two places Acts 8.16 and 19.5 that it is said of some that they were Baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus But it ought to be considered that oft in the Scriptures what is not exprest is understood yea that very Form expressed 8.16 is comprehensive of the other and if no more be expressed by him that is the Administrator if he be sound in the Faith and that the person to be Baptized hath a sound Faith that Form is sufficient it is not exprest that the Eunuch gave any other confession of his Faith before he was Baptized but that Jesus Christ is the Son of God but will it therefore follow that he believed no other Article of the Christian Faith but that and confessed no other In his further Essay to defend his assertion that Christ commanded the Apostles to Baptize with the Spirit he saith Baptisme with the Spirit tho' not wrought without Christ and his Grace is instrumentally done by men fitted of God for that purpose and therefore no absurdity follows that Baptisme with the Spirit should be expressed as the action of the Apostles for tho' it be Christ by his Grace that gives Spiritual Gifts yet the Apostle Rom. 1.11 speaks of his imparting to them Spiritual Gifts and he tells the Corinthians that he had begotten them thro' the Gospel 1 Cor. 4.15 To convert the heart is properly the work of Christ and yet the Scripture oftentimes ascribes it unto Men as being the Instruments and Paul 's commission was to turn Men from Darkness to Light Ans I acknowledge such like answers I had formerly given in some of my former Books to the like Objection but I am come to see the weakness and defect of it in order therefore to detect the fallacy of this assertion that the Apostles might be as well said to Baptize with the Spirit as to Beget to Convert to Impart some Spiritual Gift c. Let it be considered that Baptisme with the Holy Spirit is not only another thing than Conversion or imparting some Spiritual Gift c. that it is incomparably greater for Baptisme with the Spirit is equivalent to the mission of the Spirit and his Inhabitation in Believers and his being given to them all Spiritual Gifts of Faith Conversion Regeneration however so true and real are but works and effects of the Spirit with whom Men may be said Instrumentally to work but the giving the Holy Spirit to which Baptisme with the Holy Spirit is equivalent is of a higher Nature than any or all these Spiritual Gifts differing as much as the Giver differs from his Gifts For as to Create is only proper to God and Christ and the Holy Ghost to Redeem by way of Ransome and Satisfaction to Divine Justice is only proper to Christ without any concurrence of Men or Angels so to Baptize with the Holy Ghost or endue therewith or give or send the Holy Ghost is only proper to God or Christ and not to Men so much as Instrumentally there is no such Phrase to be found in all the Scripture as that any Man did Baptize with the Holy Ghost in any case or sense we ought not to allow such odd Phrases so forrain to Scripture otherwise the greatest absurdities might follow and a Power of Creating and Redeeming might be given to Men at this rate by adding the word Instrumentally but as we are to allow no Instrumental Creators or Redeemers so no Instrumental giver of the Holy Ghost or Baptizers with the same The Holy Ghost is God himself and it is too arrogant and wild to say that Men who in respect of God are as Worms can give their Creator and Maker The Scripture indeed tells us that the Holy Ghost was given thro' the laying on of the Apostles
hath got a late Patron and Assistant a Clergy Man of the Church of England formerly though not in present Office one that calleth himself Edmund Ely's who hath Printed lately two half Sheets in Vindication of G. Whitehead's vile Error and blaming my Christian Assertion The Title of one of his half Sheets being this G. Keith's saying that the Light within is not sufficient to Salvation without something else proved to be contrary to the Foundation of the Christian Religion These two half Sheets are printed and sold by T. Soule the Quakers Printer next door to their Meeting-house in White-heart Court in Grace-church-street 1697. By which it appears they are very fond of this Patron to their Cause and particularly that G. Whitehead is so by the Commendation he gives of him in his late printed Antidote However this may seem to some an improper Digression yet if they well consider the occasion of it they will if Impartial acknowledge it both proper and convenient SECT XII AND hereby it may easily appear what Spirit hath Acted the first Teachers that appeared among the Quakers as chiefly G. F. and G. W. to oppose so keenly and earnestly the practice of those two Divine Institutions of Water-Baptism and the Supper namely to draw People into a forgetfulness of all Faith in Christ without us as he dyed and rose again and is Ascended into Heaven for the proper Memorials of Christ Crucified being rejected and laid aside as well as the Doctrin it self not only not Preached but opposed as contrary to the Scripture the drift and aim of that Spirit that hath Acted them both against the one and the other is plainly manifest and how it s opposing the Doctrin of Faith in the Man Christ without us is the great cause of its opposing these external Practices which are such proper means together with the Doctrine to propagate and preserve the true Christian Faith in the World And indeed upon that Hypothesis or Foundation laid by their principal Teachers that there is no need of Preaching Faith in the Man Christ without for Remission of Sin and eternal Salvation but the only thing needful is the Light within as it universally enlightenth all Mankind either to be Preached or Believed as a late Writer against them hath well observed these outward Practices of Water-Baptism and the outward Supper are useless and insignificant Formalities for they were never appointed to signifie Remission of Sin Justification and Salvation only by obedience to the Light within excluding the necessity of Faith in the Man Christ without us whose alone Obedience unto Death for us is the only meritorious Cause of the Remission of our Sins of Justification and eternal Salvation and of all that inward Grace and Virtue of the Holy Spirit whereby we are inwardly Sanctified and made meet to receive that eternal Inheritance But though the Spirit that first appeared to Act in these Men the first Teachers and Leaders of that People did prove it self to be Antichristian by opposing the Memorials of Christ without us yet many simple and honest hearted People knew nothing of this design and however in part leavened with that Spirit in respect of its opposition to these outward Institutions of Baptism and the Supper yet by God's great Mercy were preserved from being prevailed upon by it to oppose the Doctrine and Faith of Christ as he outwardly Suffered Dyed and Rose again and is in Heaven our Intercessor among whom I can justly and uprightly number both R.B. and my self both of us having been preserved sound in our Faith as touching the Faith in Christ without us however otherwise hurt and byassed by them in relation to these two outward Institutions of Baptism and the Supper and my Charity leads me to believe that if R.B. had lived in the Body to this day to see the ill effects that his Writing against these Divine Institutions have had and the bold opposition that many have of late more than formerly made to the necessity of the Faith in Christ Crucified and the Preaching of it even here in Christendom since the Question hath been more distinctly stated betwixt my Opposers and me touching the necessity of the Faith asserted by me and opposed by them he would have plainly seen and readily acknowledged his Error in Writing against these Divine Institutions There is yet another of their Teachers who is of late years become a Person of no small Note among the Quakers viz. John Gratton whom I cannot well pass without observing his Ignorant and Inconsiderate way of Arguing against these Divine Institutions especially as touching one of his main Arguments he hath framed from a most false and perverse Understanding of that place in Heb. 6.1 2. Therefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrin of Christ let us go on to Perfection where in his Book called John Baptist decreasing Printed many years ago and Re-printed in the year 1696 he layeth the Foundation of his Argument against Water-Baptism upon the word in that place LEAVING which he hath caused to be Printed more than once in his Book in Capital Letters for a Monument it will be of his gross Ignorance and yet bold Presumption thus to pervert the Holy Scripture from thence inferring that Water-Baptism is to be left off and laid aside for thus be argues p. 47. of the last Edition 1697. If they had been commanded by Christ to have been used to the Worlds end then why should Paul for so I call that Author have been so earnest at that day which was soon after Christ's Ascension to have had them then to leave them and to go on to a more Manful Powerful perfect State Ans At this rate of Arguing not only Water-Baptism but the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is also to be left for the Author mentions the Doctrin of Baptisms in the Plural Number which John Gratton most unfairly and falsly quotes in the Singular Baptism for Baptisms Also by the same Argument Repentance from dead works and faith towards God the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment are all to be left off from being Preached or Believed But the true Sense is obvious of the word leaving i.e. not to Treat or Write upon these first Principles further at present but to Treat of other things as when a Man hath laid the Foundation of a House he goeth on to Build a Superstructure upon it And as Ignorant and Impertinent doth he discover himself to be in his other Treatise preceeding the other of Baptism and the Supper where from the Word Elements used in Gal. 4.3 9. he concludes that Water-Baptism is one of these beggerly Elements Paul opposed because Water is an Element and after this rate divers others of their Teachers have Argued but the Word Translated Elements there Gal. 4.3 9. hath no relation to the Water-Baptism nor to the Element of Water but to Principles and Doctrins of the Jews relating to the Jewish Rites and Ceremonies the Greek
is betwixt the Husband and the Wife who are said to be one Flesh This is a great Mystery said Paul but I speak concerning Christ and the Church who according to Paul's Doctrine as they are one Spirit so they are one Flesh And as elsewhere he said we are of his Flesh and of his Bone and forasmuch as the Children were partakers of Flesh and Blood he took part of the same wherefore he is not ashamed to call them Brethren Now in this R.B. was in a great Error that by his thus excluding the Flesh of Christ's outward Body from being any means of the Saints Communion with God he excludes the said Body of Christ from being any necessary part of the Mediator and at this rate of his Arguing only the Divine Light or Seed in Men is the Mediator betwixt God and Men but according to the Doctrine of the Apostle Paul the Mediator of God and Men who is one is the Man Christ Jesus and by the Man Christ Jesus is understood in Scripture not the Spirit only nor the Soul of his Manhood only but the Body also together with the Soul even Jesus Christ made of the Seed of David according to the Flesh And as really as there is a Relative Union betwixt Brethren and near Kindred with respect to their Flesh and Blood on which account it is said Concerning Joseph Gen. 37.27 He is our Brother and our Flesh and 2 Sam. 5.1 The Tribes of Israel said unto David behold we are thy Bone and thy Flesh So believing Gentiles as well as believing Jews may say concerning the Man Christ who is the Seed of the Woman of whom to wit Eve we are all descended we are his Bone and Flesh and because he hath taken Flesh and Blood like unto us therefore in that very respect he is compleatly qualified and fitted to be our Mediator and High Priest with God by whom because of the true Nature of Man consisting of a true reasonable Soul and true and real Body of Man which the Eternal Word is united unto we have Communion with God His fourth and last Argument hath the like Defect with the former That which Feedeth upon it shall never Dye but the Bodies of all Men once Dye Ans Men are said in Scripture to Dye though the Soul Dyeth not yet Men are said to Dye because the Vital Union of the Soul with the Body is Dissolved which being but for a Time and that a very small Time as a Moment in respect of Eternity and after that their Bodies shall be raised up again and Vitally be United to their Souls therefore by the contrary Argument by the Flesh of Christ that the Saints Feed upon must be meant in part his outward Body of Flesh now Glorified which is a Glorious Spiritual Body because the Resurrection of Christ's Body is the Ground of the Saints Hope wrought in them by the Spirit of Christ that their Bodies shall be raised up and shall together with their Souls inherit Eternal Life And to conclude this whole Matter when Christ said it is the Spirit that Quickneth the Flesh profits nothing His meaning is that according to their Carnal and Fleshly Sense it doth not profit as if he had said it would profit you nothing to Eat my Flesh as ye imagin by the Bodily Mouth but to Eat it Spiritually and by Faith this doth profit but to take the Words the Flesh profits nothing in the Sense that some take them is most Blasphemous as to say Christ's outward Body of Flesh profits nothing to our Salvation for this would make his Coming and Death for us in the Flesh to have been in vain and also would render our Faith Vain that he did so come yea so necessary was Christ's coming in the Flesh for our Salvation that it is by his Flesh and Soul Constituting his Manhood that we have his Spirit the Man Christ is that Olive Tree consisting of Soul and Body United Personally to the Godhead of the Eternal Word which giveth us the Oyl of the Holy Spirit and poureth it into our Hearts and as in the Natural Olive Tree it is by its Body that we have of its Oyl or Spirit and when we Eat of its Oyl we are said to Eat of the Tree because the Tree yields us its Oyl even as when we Eat of an Apple or Drink the Fruit of it or of the Vine we may be said to Eat of the Apple-Tree and Vine-Tree the Fruit being what the Tree naturally yields so the Man Christ consisting of Soul and Body is that Precious Olive Tree and Vine-Tree that yields us the Oyl and Wine of the Holy Spirit and pours it into our Hearts who Believe in him and Love him and as Effectual as his Soul and Flesh of his Manhood is now to Believers for their receiving the Spirit by the same since he came in the Flesh no less Effectual it was to Believers before he came in the Flesh even from the beginning of the World according to B. Jewel's Words he was not come in the Flesh yet they Eat his Flesh to wit by Faith he had not Shed his Blood yet they Drank his Blood viz. by Faith and both his Flesh and his Blood before it had any visible Being or Existence together with his Soul was Effectual to Believers in all Ages for their Reception of the Spirit and all Spiritual Blessings of Justification and Sanctification c. as well before he came in the Flesh as since And thus he was the Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World whose Death was of the same Efficacy from the beginning and will be to the end of the World to all that believe in him And as God is the giver of the Spirit and of all the Graces of the Spirit so he giveth it to Believers by and through Christ even the Man Christ who is both the Procurer and Dispenser of all that Grace that God giveth unto them and though Men most properly Eat the Meat and Drink the Drink that is bought with Money yet in ordinary Speech by a common Metonymy they are said to Eat and Drink the Money that buyeth it as the Poor Widows two Mites were called her Living so after some sort though the inward Life and Spirit of Christ be the most immediate Food of the Souls of Believers Yet because the Flesh of Christ as it was broken for us and his Blood as it was Shed for us is the Price and Purchase Money which hath procured to us the inward Life and Spirit of Christ with the various Graces and Gifts thereof therefore we are said to Eat his Flesh and Drink his Blood by the Like Metonymy But there is much more in this Great Mystery than can be demonstrated by these Similitudes and Examples or any others of the like Nature SECT IV. P. 77. R.B. chargeth it as another Error which he calleth a General Error wherein he saith they all agree viz. both Papists and
Christ's Death as he Dyed outwardly may be forgotten But if by the Lord's Death is understood his outward Death by as good reason by his coming is understood his outward coming SECT VII HAving thus shewn the Invalidity of his Proofs that by the Lord 's coming is understood his inward coming into their Hearts and not his outward coming I shall give some clear Reasons why it must be understood his outward coming at the general Judgment The first Reason is because the Reason of the Command continuing to his last outward coming the Command doth also continue for so long doth any Command continue in Force as the Reason of it continueth but the Reason of the Command Do this in remembrance of me c. doth continue to Christ's last outward coming which Reason is this that by that Practice they might remember the Lord's Death and not only remember it but shew it forth Publickly Declare and Profess it and the inestimable Benefits they have by it Now put the case that any had so good and living Remembrance of it that they needed not the outward things to put them in remembrance thereof yet that is not enough to Answer the Reason and End of the Command which is by this outward Practice to shew it forth and declare it by a publick Profession that they owe Remission of Sin and Salvation to the Crucified Jesus and that they are not ashamed to own and confess him their Saviour their King their Priest and Prophet and in Token thereof they give Testimony of their Obedience to these his peculiar positive Laws and Institutions of Water-Baptism and the Supper for if these be rejected by the same Method Men may reject all other his positive Institutions relating to External Practice of Religion and so turn the Christian Religion into meer Deism and Pagan Morality The second Reason is that the end of this Institution being a solemn Commemoration of Christ's Death and Sacrifice which he offered up to God for our Sins above sixteen hundred Years ago and of the great Spiritual Blessings we have thereby there is the same Cause and End for it to continue to our Day and to the end of the World as when it was first appointed Had it been indeed only a Prenuniciative Sign of some things to come or of the hidden invisible Substance as W. Penn terms it meaning thereby the Spirit of Christ within at the coming of the Spirit within into their Hearts the Sign might have ceased as the Prenunciative Signs of Christ's outward coming in the Flesh were to cease after his outward coming and accordingly did cease But the Signs of Water-Baptism and the Supper as commanded by Christ and Practised by the Apostles were not such Prenunciative Signs of the coming of his Spirit within them but were chiefly Commemorative Signs of him as he had come for both of them were appointed by him when he was come and the Institution of Baptism was appointed by him after his Death and Resurrection the Institution of the Supper so near to his Death that it was in the very Night when he was Betrayed and at which time he had the great Sense and Weight of his Sufferings upon him and as then in great part begun and because the use of those Signs of Bread and Wine the Bread being broken and the Wine poured out was a Solemn Commemoration of his having given his Body to be broken for them and his Blood to be shed for them therefore he said Take Eat this is my Body that is broken for you he did not say this is my Spirit or this is the inward visible hid Substance that ye shall afterwards receive but this is my Body Take Eat and though they were not to eat his Body with the Carnal Mouth but only the Bread which signified it yet by Faith they were to eat his Body that is to say they were to partake of a Mystical Union with his Body and to have their Right and Interest in him confirmed to them by that Symbol by means whereof they were to receive plentifully of his Grace and Spirit as the Consequent and Effect of that Union with him Therefore they were not so to mind the Effect as to neglect the great Cause of that Effect which great cause was his giving his Body to be broken for them and his Blood to be shed for to mind only the Effect and neglect the Cause were like the Hogs that greedily run after the Acorns or Nuts but are unmindful of the Tree that beareth them But as the Spiritual Eyes of Believers are to be to the Graces and Gifts of Christ so especially and chiefly to him from and by whom they have them and their Faith and Love ought chiefly to act upon him and upon God the Father in and through him as also upon the Holy Spirit as principally residing in him from and by whom we derive our several Measures of the same The Third Reason is this when Christ gave the Cup he said this Cup is the new Testament in my Blood shed for the remission of the sins of many Now how is that Cup the New Testament surely no other ways but as an Obsignatory Sign of the New Testament obsignating to Believers remission of Sins by his Blood outwardly shed which New Testament hath in it the Force and Essence of the Covenant of Grace which God â—â—keth with Believers through Christ the Mediator of it and as Christ hath confirmed this Covenant of Grace and Testament with his Blood that was Shed once for us so he hath given to Believers this obsignating Pledge of it by way of Investiture as when a Man has an Estate of Land conveyed to him and gets the Investiture of it it is by some outward Sign as here in England in some Places by delivering to him Twig and Turf and as Kings were Invested with their Kingly Power by having Oyl poured on them and as Aaron was Invested into the Office of Priesthood And indeed all Covenants that ever God made with any People have always been by some outward obsignatory things as in his Covenant he made with Noah he gave the Bow in the Cloud for the Token of that Covenant in the Covenant with Abraham he gave the Sign of Circumcision which by a Metonymy is called God's Covenant in Scripture Also the Sacrifices under the Law were Signs of obsignatory of God's Covenant with them who offered those Sacrifices And in all the Covenants that we read of in Scripture that any of the Fathers made with the Neighbouring Princes or Inhabitants there were obsignatory Signs and Pledges so that who rightly understand the Nature of a Covenant Transacted after any publick manner must acknowledge it cannot be without some obsignatory Pledge or Sign outwardly to be seen given by the one Party to the other insomuch that it seems to be a general Instinct in Mankind or at least the Equivalent of it an universal Custom received and practised even among
the filthiness of the Flesh but to signifie the inward washing by the Blood and Spirit of Christ upon the Soul and Conscience the which when so washed is a good Conscience and the effect of that inward washing is the answer of a good Conscience and indeed to me it is evident that Peter in this description of Baptisme first negatively what it is not doth refer by way of comparison to the legal purifyings under Moses Law by Blood and the Ashes of an Heiser with Water sprinkling the Unclean which as the Author to the Hebrews saith sanctified to the purifying the Flesh Heb. 9.13 and yet even this washing was not to cleanse the Body from natural filth but from the legal uncleanness that Men had on divers occasions as when they touched a dead Body they were legally unclean and because of that they were not to come into the Tabernacle until they were cleansed with this Water of purifying sprinkled on them But the Baptisme with Water under the Gospel had not that but a greater signification and being duly received had a greater and more noble effect viz. to signifie the spiritual cleansing by Christ and to be a means of Grace far greater than under the Law Again p. 17. He thus argueth If we take the second and affirmative definition to wit that it is the Answer or Confession of a good Conscience c. then Water-Baptisme is not it since as our Adversaries will not deny Water-Baptisme doth not always imply it neither is it any necessary consequence thereof Answ This Consequence also is not good because though Water-Baptisme in the literal sense strictly taken without any Metonymy is not the answer of a good Conscience as the Lamb was not the Passover but a signification of it yet the Lamb is called in Scripture the Passover by a Metonymy of the Sign put for the thing signified that is very common in Scripture as in other Authors so the Baptisme with Water metonymically may be called the answer of a good Conscience being the thing signified thereby That he saith their Adversaries will not deny that Water-Baptisme doth not always imply it neither is it any necessary consequence thereof in that he was under a mistake for they will say and do say that Water-Baptisme doth always imply it to such as duly and worthily receive it and that it is always a necessary consequence or concomitant thereof upon due and well qualified Receivers And if nothing appear to the contrary by words or actions but that the receivers are duly qualified tho' some of them be not such really yet in the judgment of Charity even according to Scripture rule they are called such as Paul calleth these of the Churches to whom he writ Saints and yet no doubt all were not real Saints in the Churches though by Profession they were such Again whereas pag. 18. he argueth thus Peter calls this here which saveth the Antitypos the Antitype or the thing figured whereas it is usually translated as if the like figure did now save us thereby insinuating that as they were saved by Water in the Ark so are we now by Water-Baptisme but this Interpretation he saith crosseth his sense Answ His Argument from the Greek word used by Peter viz. Antitypos he should have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the neuter gender is indeed altogether weak and groundless as if it only signified the thing and could not be understood of the Figure of the thing the contrary whereof appeareth from Heb. 9.24 where the holy Places made with hands are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Antitypes of the true which are truly translated the Figures of the true holy Places made without hands Again whereas he argueth that Water-Baptisme is not meant p. 19. in 1 Pet. 3.21 that the Baptisme there mentioned is said to save us but Protestants deny it to be absolutely necessary to Salvation Answ Nor hath this Argument any force for though it is not absolutely necessary to Salvation yet that it is in God's ordinary way where it can be duely had and by whom it is duely received one of the ordinary means of Salvation it is truly said to save as the Doctrine of the Gospel outwardly Preached by the Ministry of Men is saving by way of means and as the Holy Scriptures are said by Paul to be able to make wise unto Salvation through Faith in Christ Jesus and said Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 4.16 Take heed unto thy self and unto thy Doctrine continue in them for in doing this thou shalt both save thy self and them that hear thee And as concerning the means of Salvation though all of them when really given of God are very profitable yet all are not alike necessary nor alike given nor afforded unto all some yea many never perhaps heard the Gospel truly Preached unto them by the Voice of Man yet having the Scriptures read unto them that hath proved an outward means of their Salvation the Lord working inwardly by his Grace and Spirit to make the same effectual to them And as at times the Book of the Holy Scriptures supplieth the defect of a Vocal Ministry so at times a Vocal Ministry doth supply the want of the Book of the Scriptures and thus though Baptisme and the Supper outwardly administred are means of Grace and Salvation when duly received yet they are not so necessary as the Doctrine of the Gospel as outwardly delivered by Men and the Books of the Holy Scripture If any shall object that it is better to keep to the literal Sense of the words in Peter than to run to the Metonymy which ought not to be done but in case of necessity I answer what way soever the Baptisme in 1 Pet. 3.32 be taken as suppose for the Baptisme of the Spirit yet such whoso take it must run to a Metonymy for the inward Baptisme of the Holy Spirit is not the Answer or Confession of a good Conscience otherwise than by a Metonymy of the Cause for the effect The Answer or Confession of a good Conscience being the effect of the inward Baptisme and operation of the Spirit and not the inward Baptisme it self And indeed such Figures and Metonymycal Speeches are very frequent in Scripture to which for not well adverting many are drawn into most false Interpretations of Scriptures and most hurtful Errors as the Papists by taking the words of Christ this is my Body in a mere literal Sense without any Metonymy To conclude upon this Argument the most that with any colour or shadow of Reason can be inferred from this place in 1 Pet. 3.21 is that Water-Baptisme alone neither doth or can save any without the inward Baptisme or operation of the Spirit all which is readily granted nor yet doth the inward Baptisme though joyned to the outward save without any thing else but both the inward Baptisme and outward do save us as Peter plainly declareth by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the
he is very short and defective in his Expression they were both appointed and used in the beginning I mean from the time of Christ's Resurrection and Ascension to be Figures and Signs of Christ's outward Body that was broken for us on the Cross and his Blood that was outwardly shed In the first place and consequently of the inward Graces of the Spirit and Benefits coming to Believers by his outward Body and Blood and by the Man Christ wholly considered both in Soul and Body and whereas he saith 2. They were no longer to endure than till the Substance was come All this sheweth W. Penn's great Misunderstanding of the Nature of these Institutions both of Baptisme and the Supper as if they only signified some inward hidden Virtue which he calls a more hidden and spiritual Substance that was to come and so were only as he calls them in his Defence of his Key called a Reply to a pretended Answer c. Prenuniative and forerunning Signs but were not commemorative Signs as well of things past as of things present for this is utterly false that Water in that Baptisme which the Apostles used after Christ's Resurrection and Ascension was prenunciative and not commemorative for on the contrary it was not simply prenunciative but commemorative as commemorating and signifying the Blood of Christ that had been shed outwardly for the Remission of our Sins and the same commemoration and signification had the Wine in the practise of the Lord's Supper and the Bread that was broken in the Supper signified after Christ's Death and Resurrection his Body that was outwardly broken on the Cross and that outward practise was Instituted by Christ for a Memorial of his Death and Sufferings which all true Believers in Christ ought to have fresh and lively in their Minds to which the outward practise both of Baptisme and the Supper is of great use and the more frequent the practise of the Supper is being duly used as with Faith Reverence and Devotion the more profitable it is Therefore said Christ as oft as ye eat this bread c. As if one did say as oft as ye Pray with true Faith and Fervency it turns the more to your Spiritual Advantage And though the Spirit of Christ in true Believers is the great and principal rememberer unto them yet he oft doth remember them in the use of that outward Practise using it as a means and blessing it unto them even as the Spirit useth the frequent outward Institutions and Exhortations that Ministers give to Believers as a means and blesseth that outward means unto them also the more to quicken and enlighten them and as Peter said to stir up the pure mind in them by way of remembrance which was the end of his Epistles and also of Paul's Epistles unto the Churches and therefore it is but weakly and falsly argued by many of the People called Quakers and their Teachers the Spirit in them is their remembrancer and they have the more hidden and invisible substance in them and therefore there is no use of these outward Signs to them for this Argument has the same force against all outward Teaching and External Acts of Worship And indeed as I have oft observed and considered the chiefest Arguments used by these Men against these outward Practises of the outward Baptisme and the Supper may be as much brought against all outward Teaching and External Acts of Worship and against all use of Books yea of the Holy Scriptures themselves and the like may be said of these Arguments that are commonly in the Mouths of the People called Quakers that Bread and Wine and Water are carnal things and visible which may be touched tasted handled whereas the Scripture saith touch not tast not handle not which are all to perish with the using and the kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost Again we look not at things seen for they are temporal but at the things unseen which are eternal and Col. 3. If ye be risen with Christ seek the things which are above and set your affection on things above not on things on the earth but Water Bread and Wine are things on earth and let no man judge you in meats and drinks Col. 2.17 which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ All these and the like Scriptures I say may with as great show of reason be brought against all good Books and outward Teachings Instructions Exhortations yea against the Books of the Holy Scriptures which G. Fox hath called the Carnal and Earthly Letter that he touched and handled as much as Water Bread and Wine and is visible and consequently by their Argument is not to be look'd into nor is the Scripture nor the best of words uttered in Speech or Written the Kingdom of God or the hidden invisible Substance as neither Water Bread and Wine yet all these have their use when duly used on a Spiritual Account for as words signifie and hold forth Christ and the inward and spiritual Benefits that Believers have by him to the outward hearing so do these other hold forth Christ and his spiritual Blessings to their Sight Tast and Feeling for which reason antient Writers did call the outward Baptisme and Supper verbum visible i.e. the visible word God having so appointed it in his Wisdome that the Knowledge of Divine and Spiritual things after a sort should be given to us by outward Signs and Symbols that affect our Senses and by our Senses as by so many Doors and Windows should be let into our Souls by means whereof through the inward Operation of the Holy Spirit the inward and Spiritual Faculties of our Souls and Minds are awakened and enabled to apprehend the Spiritual things themselves whose Symbols and Emblems these outward Elementary things are And none of these Scriptures above mentioned have any relation to the outward Baptisme and Supper which were the Institutions of Christ but to such outward things the observations of which were after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men as not only the Jewish Rites but Gentile Customs and Traditions also were touching Meats and Drinks and other things which the Apostle calls Col. 2.20.21 22. the Rudiments of the World which as they are of a perishing nature so the use and service of them but so is not the use and service of the outward Baptisme and Supper which is a holy Commemoration of our Lord's Death and Sufferings and of the great benefits we have thereby tending to excite our ardent Love and Affections to him and to raise them up to ascend to him in Heaven therefore though true Believers at Christ's command use the outward things yet neither their Minds nor Affections are set on them but on him and the heavenly Blessings they have by him which holy Commemoration we should not let dye or perish in us but keep alive for our spiritual Benefit and Advantage
and Blood that therefore he is a Carnal and Bloody Man or because the Quakers have Flesh and Blood as other Men therefore there Church is a Carnal and Bloody Church and as raw and defective is R.B. his way of Reasoning p. 25 26 27. of the above said Treatise that where the Author is the same the Matter of Ordinances is the same and the end the same and having the same effect they are never accounted more or less Spiritual because of their different times For all this is not a sufficient enumeration to prove the one not to be more Spiritual than the other there are diverse other great Considerations or Arguments besides these mentioned by him so generally and overly as in the respects above mentioned relating to their Form and Manner and greater Efficacy because of the greater plenty of Grace accompanying the latter than the former and having greater and more excellent Effects for who that knows what a true Christian is but will say he is far beyond an ordinary Religious Jew that had some degree of Faith in the promised Messiah the Scripture comparing the Jew and the Christian as the Child and the Man And who but will say that the true Gospel way of Ministry as it was in the Apostles Days and wherein they were exercised in Preaching and Prayer did far excell the Ministry of the ordinary sincere Jewish Priests and Scribes although they had one Author and one Doctrine for Substance and one end in their Ministry at large and in general and also one effect in general and at large viz. to instruct in Righteousness such as heard them And though in one sense the Jewish Baptisms and that practised by the Apostles after Christ's Resurrection had one Author viz. God yet in another sense there was a considerable difference it being God or the word Incarnate or Christ God Man that was the Author of the latter but not of the former And though the Jewish Water-Baptisms and the Christian Water-Baptisme which is but one do agree in relation to their end in some sort yet there is a great difference in that very respect for tho' the remote end of the Jewish Baptisms was to signifie Remission of Sin through Faith in Christ yet the proximate or next end of those Baptisms was to make them legally clean so as to be allowed to come into the Congregation of the Jewish Church but the end of the Christian Water-Baptism even proximately and nextly considered is to signifie Remission of Sins and the spiritual Cleansing by Christ and also to indicate such Baptized Persons and recognize or acknowledge them to be Members of the Church of Christ that is more excellent and honourable as far as the Christian Dispensation excelled the Judaick But that they farther argue that Water-Baptism cannot reach the Conscience to cleanse it from Sin that therefore it ought not to be practised and because Bread and Wine in the Supper cannot nourish the Soul therefore ought it not to be used in the Supper they might as well have argued against the brazen Serpent that the Jews at God's command should not have looked to it when they were poisoned with the Serpents in the Wilderness because there was no inherent Virtue in that piece of Brass to effect any Cure and they might argue as well against Naaman's going to wash in Jordan to be cured of his Leprosie I know none that plead for Water-Baptism and the outward Supper that think there is any inherent Virtue in these outward things either to wash or feed the Soul the Virtue is wholly in Christ whose Grace Power and Spirit doth accompany the due and right use of these things as they are practised in Faith and in Obedience to Christ's command And the like way they might argue against all vocal Ministry which abounds among the Quakers for no words have any inherent Virtue in them to Cure or Cleanse the Soul or profit any more than Water or Bread and Wine it is only the Grace and Spirit of Christ when it goeth along and accompanieth these outward things whether Words or those outward Elements that is effectual and maketh the use of them effectual without which they are all but as empty Cisterns that can hold no Water SECT IX ANother Argument of W. Penn against the outward Baptism and Supper is that therefore they are to be rejected now the false Church has got them yea the Whore hath made Merchandize with them and under such Historical Shadowy and Figurative Christianity has she managed her Mistery of Iniquity unto the beguiling thousands whose simplicity the Lord will have a tender regard to Ans In this way of Arguing also he is very inconsiderate for his Reason is of equal force against the Holy Scriptures and all the Doctrinal and Historical part of Christ's coming in the Flesh his Death and Sufferings c. Why the false Church has got all this and makes Merchandize therewith and therefore the Bible and the whole Historical and Doctrinal part of Christ's coming in the Flesh and his Death and Sufferings must be rejected also all Preaching and Praying and Meeting together and all external Acts of Worship must be rejected for the same reason because the false Church has got them all Tho' I think it may be said the false Church has not got either Baptisme or the Supper in the true Administration of them but rather a false show and likeness of them But what hinders that the true Church may not Practise these things aright tho' the false Practise them amiss Should the abuse of any thing commanded by God take away the use of it Must Meat Drink and Cloathing be rejected because that many abuse them But he continueth to argue against them p. 110. Reason against Railing Let it be considered that no other Apostle recommends these things nor Paul himself to either the Romans the Corinthians in his first Epistle the Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians Thessalonians Hebrews nor to Timothy Titus and Philemon Ans If so it were that in none of these Epistles Paul had mentioned them nor any other of the Apostles which yet is not so for I have answered it at large what was objected from Peter 1 Pet. 3.21 as that Water-Baptisme is not there meant and in the Epistle to the Romans Galatians Ephesians and Colossians and in that to the Hebrews Baptisme is mentioned and he hath not proved that it is not Water-Baptisme that is there meant yet it will not follow that therefore they are to be rejected seeing other places of Scripture mention both the command and practice of them so that he cannot instance one professing Christianity that was not Baptized any where in the Scripture after the command of Baptism was given by Christ to the Apostles suppose there were but one Text in all the Scripture that clearly proveth some Doctrin of the Christian Faith were not that enough for its proof As that one Text that God is a Spirit
Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed no less to the Principles of the Christian Doctrin of Christ and Oracles of God which therefore by his Argument being Elements are to be thrown aside As for his other Arguments in those two Treatises against the outward Baptism and the Supper they are no other that I can find but such as are above mentioned in my Reply to those of William Penn and Robert Barclay and therefore one Answer will serve both to them and him PART II. SECT I. The Arguments against the outward Supper examined and Refuted THus having finished my Examination and Refutation of the Arguments of the above mentioned Persons against Water-Baptism and the outward Supper in general I think fit to bring to the like Examination what R.B. hath more particularly Argued against the outward Supper as being not any longer to continue but until Christ's inward coming to arise in their Hearts and give a plain Refutation of the same In the beginning of the Chapter or Head wherein he discourseth concerning the Body and Blood of Christ although he saith truly that the Communion i.e. the Participation thereof is inward and Spiritual yet he was under a great mistake to affirm that the said Body and Blood of Christ whereof true Believers do participate is only inward which he afterwards explains to be that Light and Seed in every Man as he expresseth plainly in several places as p. 61 of the above said Treatise and p. 65 where he saith and that Christ understands the same things here viz. John 6. by his Body Flesh and Blood which is understood John 1. by the light hath enlighteneth every man and the life c. And p. 77. he chargeth it to be an Error to make the Communion or Participation of the Body Flesh and Blood of Christ to relate to that outward Body Vessel or Temple that was Born of the Virgin Mary and walked and Suffered in Judea whereas it should relate to the Spiritual Body Flesh and Blood of Christ even that Heavenly and Celestial Light and Life which was the Food and Nourishment of the Regenerate in all Ages as we have said he already proved Ans In this he was in a great Error to make the Eating or Participation of Christs Flesh and Blood to have no relation to Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood that was Born of the Virgin and Suffered Death for our Sins on the Tree of the Cross For the Regeneration of Believers and Justification with all the Spiritual Blessings of Life and Light and inward Divine Virtue and Might wherewith they are inwardly Refreshed and Nourished by Christ hath a most near and immediate Relation to Christ's outward Body and Blood and to his coming in that outward Body because that most Holy and Perfect Obedience of Christ which he performed in that Body and became Obedient to the Death of the Cross was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of all that inward Grace Virtue Light and Life whereby Regeneration was wrought in any in any Age of the World either before or since Christ came in the Flesh as well as it was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of their Justification and the Remission of their Sins For Christ Died as well for the Sins of those who lived in the Ages before he came in the Flesh as since and they had the same Benefits by his Death and by his Body and Blood that we have the same inward Grace and Light to Regenerate them as the same Mercy and Favour to Justifie them and give them the Remission of their Sins which they received through Faith in Christ as he was to come in the Flesh without them and whole Christ is the Food of true Believers I mean Christ not only considered as the Word simply but as the Word made Flesh And having taken or assumed the Seed of Abraham and the true Nature of Man into such a high Union as that the Godhead of the Word and the Manhood assumed thereby is but one Christ and as such is the Food of all true Believers both as he outwardly came in the Flesh and as he is inwardly come the Light and the Life in them and Believers Eating of Christ is their Believing in him and by their Faith being United to him and he to them so that he dwells in them and they in him And though it may be owned that Believers Feeding upon Christ's Light and Life Metaphorically and Allegorically speaking that Light and Life may be called according to Scripture Meat and Drink and Flesh and Blood of Christ as it hath many other such Metaphorical Names such as Milk Honey Wine Marrow and Fatness Oyl c. All which Names are given because of Men's Weakness and that they have not proper Words to express Divine Things by yet that ought not to make us reject and lay aside Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to the Saints feeding upon him Nor do the Arguments brought by R.B. here prove in the least what he intends as the following Examination of them will sufficiently I hope manifest He begins with a Quotation out of Augustine in his Tractat Psalm 98. The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life understand spiritually what I have spoken ye shall not eat of this body which ye see and drink this blood which they shall spill that shall crucifie me I am the living bread which have descended from heaven he called himself the bread which descended from heaven exhorting that they might believe in him c. Ans It is evident from these last Words that by Eating Augustine meant in one Sense Corporal Eating and in another Sense Believing as elsewhere Tract 25. ad cap. 6. Johan Hoc est opus Dei ut quid paras dentem ventrem crede manducasti Credere enim in eum hocest comedere panem vinum qui credit in eum manducat eum in English thus why preparest thou thy Teeth and Belly believe and thou hast eat for to believe in him is to eat the Bread and Wine who believeth in him eateth him Both these Quotations are good against the Papists who hold that Believers eat the Body of Christ Corporally with their Mouths but say nothing against this Spiritual Way of Eating Christs Body but plainly confirm it The plain Sense therefore of Augustin's Words Quoted by R.B. is this Ye shall not eat Corporally with the outward Mouth the Body of Christ which ye see but ye shall eat it Spiritually that is believe with a sincere Faith which the Spirit of God worketh in you that Christ shall give his Body that ye see speaking then to the Jews to be broken for you and his Blood even the Blood of that Body to be shed for you And in so Believing ye shall eat my Body and drink my Blood that is ye shall be united to me and I to you that I shall abide in you and
ye shall abide in me which Sense doth evidently agree with our Saviour's Words John 6.29 47. And indeed to Exclude Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to this place of Scripture as no way concerned in the Sense of these Words of it John 6.53 is plainly to Exclude Christ as he outwardly came in that outward Body from being the Object of our Christian Faith for seeing Eating here signifieth Believing by Agustine's Quotation approved by R.B. if this Spiritual Eating which is our Believing respects not the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain then Christ as he came and Suffered in that Body is no Object of the Christian Faith which is most absurb and none that is in the least acquainted with Augustin's Writings can say it ever was his meaning to deny the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain to be any wise Concerned in the Christian Faith for Augustine was a most zealous Asserter of the Necessity of Faith in Christ as he came in that Body in order to our Salvation against the Heresie of Pelagius who denied it and Writ many Books against that Heresie now Revived by many of the Quakers Teachers tho what R.B. hath Writ here I impute to his Inadvertency and do not charge him with the Pelagian Heresie for the same because from other Places of his Writings I can prove that he made the Faith of Christ's giving his Body to be Slain for us necessary to our Salvation and a part of the Christian Belief SECT II. AND as Inadvertent and Mistaken as R.B. was in his Quotation of Augustine concerning Christ's Flesh and Blood no less hath W. Penn been p. 314. of his Rejoynder to J. F. in his Quotation of Bishop Jewel in his Sermon upon Jos 6.1 2 3. Who speaking of what Christ was to the Jews in the Wilderness says thus Christ had not yet taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did eat his Body he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood St. Paul saith all did eat the same Spiritual Meat that is the Body of Christ all did drink of the same Spiritual Drink that is the Blood of Christ and that as truly as we do now And whosoever did then so Eat lived for ever I think saith W. Penn a Pregnant and Apt Testimony to Christ's being the Christ of God before his coming in the Flesh Ans But this doth not prove that by Christ here B. Jewel meant only the Light within in these Jews and by his Body and Blood only that Light within or Seed or Principle as W. Penn would have it All that are in the least acquainted with the Doctrine of the Church of England of which B. Jewel was a Zealous Defender as in his Apologie for the same appeareth or with B. Jewel's Writings know well that the Sense which W. Penn hath here put on B. Jewel's Words never came into his Remotest Thoughts but it is no wonder that he should so misunderstand and misconstrue B. Jewel's Words when he doth so use the Scriptures themselves B. Jewel's Sense is Obvious Christ had not taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did Eat his Body viz. by Faith believing that in the time appointed of God he would take a Body and give up that Body to be Slain for their Sins he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood viz. By faith believing that after he should take flesh and blood in the fulness of time he would give his blood to be shed for the remission of their sins and by this faith all the faithful among them had Christ dwelling in them by his spirit and did know and witness his spirit to regenerate and sanctifie them to quicken and refresh them and nourish them as meat and drink doth refresh and nourish the body of man As for his Quotations out of Joshua Sprig and others its no wonder he doth so Magnifie them seeing its but too evident the Quakers have sucked that Poisonous Milk out of the Breasts of such Men who have been in the same Errors before them But to return to R.B. his Arguments whereby he laboureth but to no purpose to prove that the Flesh there mentioned John 6.53 c. hath no Relation to his outward Flesh First saith he p. 63 because that it is said both that it came down from Heaven yea that it is he that came down from Heaven Now all Christians at present generally acknowledge that the outward Body of Christ came not down from Heaven neither was it that part of Christ which came down from Heaven Ans 1. By Himself that came down from Heaven who is called by Paul the second Adam the Lord from Heaven Heavenly the quickning Spirit cannot be meant the inward Principle of Light in Men abstractly considered from the Fountain of it which dwelt in the Man Christ but chiefly the Light as in him and consequentially that which Men receive out of his Fulness according to their several Measures And as our Regeneration and Salvation have a necessary Dependance on that fulness of Light Life and Grace that dwells in him out of which we receive our several Measures so they have a necessary respect to the Man Christ both Soul and Body in which that Fulness dwelleth because the Soul and Body of Christ even his outward and visible Body was concerned in that great Work of our Redemption in what he did and Suffered for us Therefore God hath Exalted the same Man Jesus Christ both in Soul and Body in Unity with his Godhead to be a Prince and Saviour to give Repentance and Remission of Sin Grace and Glory and all Spiritual Blessings to all that shall be saved This ancient Writers have explained by the Example of a red hot Iron exceedingly burning and shining the Fire and Light in the same answering to the Godhead and the Iron answering to the Manhood Now when this fired Iron burns or lightens any Stick of Wood that is applied to it it is not the Fire only without the Iron nor the Iron only without the Fire but both joyntly that have an Operation upon the Wood to Kindle and Lighten it even so it is the Godhead of Christ in Unity with his Manhood consisting of Soul and Body that wrought that outward Redemption for us and doth inwardly produce in us the blessed Effects of it by his Spirit in Renewing and Sanctifying us Justifying us and giving us Eternal Life and Glory Ans 2. Because Christ's outward Body of Flesh was Miraculously Conceived by the Power of the most High and in that respect had a Heavenly Original as well as that it was really the Woman's Seed and part of the Virgins Substance therefore it may be said to be from Heaven and to be Heavenly as well as Earthly as Wheat and Barly and other Grains that Grow in America which come Originally from England are called English Grain even in America though they are also American
Heathens as to my certain knowledge it is among the American Heathens who in all their Covenants make use of Signs for the greater Security and Confirmation Thus in the 50th Psalm it is said gather my Saints together who have made a covenant with me by sacrifice v. 5. And if any should be so Stiff and Pertinacious as to deny that outward Signs are necessary to the Confirmation of Covenants universally yet the Case is plain here as to the Supper for Christ himself hath said it this Cup is the new Testament in my Blood c. Which must have this meaning that the Cup was Christ's Testament as Circumcision was God's covenant with Abraham and his seed for so it was called in Scripture that is to say the Cup is a sign of Christ's Testament and of the covenant of grace that God hath made with believers through Christ the Mediator of it But if any object this would seem to make the outward Baptism and Supper of so great necessity as that it cannot be said that the Covenant is duly confirmed without them betwixt God and Believers Ans It sheweth inded a great necessity of them as in respect of any People being in Covenant with God in a visible way of a Church and as Members of a visible Church or Society well and duly constituted for all the Members of a visible Church as they are in Covenant with God inwardly by the Faith and Obedience of their Hearts so they are in Covenant with him outwardly by the Confession of their Mouths and other External Acts of Religion whereby they declare their professed Subjection to him and to his Laws Hence we find in Scripture that not only Faith is required in order to Salvation but Confession also and that Confession is not only with the Mouth but by External Works of the Body proceeding from a living Principle of Faith in the Heart among which Works are the External Practices of outward Baptism and the Supper where they can be duly had whereby they declare their Subjection to the positive Laws and Institutions of Christ and thereby distinguish themselves from either Jews or Pagans who may be Moral Men and Profess Faith and Religion towards God as a Creator and yet be professed Enemies to the Christian Faith such as many Jews and Heathens were in the Apostles Days and are in our Days And therefore the outward Baptism and the Supper have been not unfitly called and esteemed Badges of Christianity peculiarly distinguishing Christians from Jews and Pagans though not the only Badges but when they are accompanied with a good Conversation of Sobriety Justice and Piety they do make the distinction betwixt true Christians and Jews and Heathens much more apparent for if these External Practices Instituted by Christ be laid aside whereby shall it outwardly appear that Men and Women are Christians If it be said by the Sobriety Justice and Piety of their Conversation But these are no positive distinguishing Marks of Christianity because Men and Women that are no Christians may have as much of the out-side of Sobriety Justice and Piety towards God as many true Christians have If it be again said their frequent Prayer to God in the Name of Christ and calling on the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ in Prayer is a Badge of their Christianity I answer in part it is so but not in full or in the whole for he that not only Prayeth to God in the Name of Christ and confesseth him in Words but also sheweth his Obedience and Subjection to all the Commands of Christ the least as well as the greatest whereof the outward Baptism and the Supper are some is the most Accomplished Christian and beareth the most compleat Badge of Christianianity And though Men's Ignorance in their not knowing them or not being persuaded concerning them that they are the Commands of Christ being darkned by the Prejudice of Education or fasly persuaded by Seducers and false Teachers doth in part excuse them or at least where Sincerity is as to the main gives ground of Hope that God will forgive them the Omission of these Practices yet where Obedience is not given to every Command of Christ even the least as well as the greatest though the Omission be through Ignorance or false Persuasion yet it is a Sin and renders the Persons found in that Omission defective and incomplete Christians SECT VIII THE 4 th Reason is this These outward practices of Baptism and the Supper are not only visible Signs and Pledges of our being in Covenant with God thro' Christ and that as he is our God so we are his People but they are also the visible Signs and Pledges that we are in the Unity and Communion of the Church as Children of one Family begot of one Father having one Faith and Hope one Lord and being Members of one Body And though the Communion of Believers consists chiefly in the Spirit and the inward Graces thereof yet as they are a visible Body and Society they are to have some outward and visible Signs and Pledges of the same that carry some distinguishing Character to distinguish them not only from professed Infidels but also from loose and scandalous Persons professing the Christian Faith with them Therefore as in the Jewish Church God had appointed that whoever did not obey the Mosaical Precepts were to be excluded the Congregation and debarred from the external Privileges that they had as a Church even so Christ has appointed that whosoever professing him in Words deny him in Works and walk disorderly and offensively as well as who err concerning the Faith so as not to hold the Head that they ought to be rejected and disowned in token whereof they are to be debarred from the external Signs of the Saints Communion with God and Christ and one with another Otherwise what can be meant by rejecting casting out and purging out in the Scriptures of the New Testament Also by the word separating and withdrawing so as to have no Fellowship with them Surely it was more than a verbal denyal of them or giving forth a Paper against them Doth not Paul tell us what it was when he saith 1 Cor. 5.11 If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator c with such an one no not to eat This not to eat cannot be meant the common Eating but such as that 1 Cor. 10.21 to wit at the Lord's Table And therefore the Lord did see it meet that as the Outward Baptism should be a Sign declarative of the Persons Baptized taking or putting on the Profession of a Christian so the Eating at the Lord's Table should be a Sign that they did remain Faithful under that Profession and did continue in the Unity and Communion of the Church as Paul's words declare We being many are one bread and are all made partakers of that one bread c. Even as under the Law the receiving of Circumcision was the Sign or Badge of
Man Christ and because the Fulness is not in us and never was or shall be in any Man but in the Man Christ Jesus alone that was Born of the Virgin therefore he and he only because of the Fulness of Grace and Truth that was and is in him was Ordained and Appointed to be the Great and only and alone Sacrifice for the Sins of the World being the Head of the Body which is his Church it was only proper that the Sufferings that should be in the Head only should be that compleat only and alone Satisfactory and Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of Men As the Arguments above mentioned in my Queries to G. Whitehead and W. Penn do plainly demonstrate And though in Christ when he Suffered for the Sins of the World at his Death his Godhead did not Suffer yet all that was in him the Godhead excepted did Suffer Note again Reader That although I find no cause to give an Answer to the Book of John Pennington above-mentioned called The Fig-Leaf Covering c. Because I had said in my second Narrative p. 33. that very Book being a pretended Answer to my Book of Explications and Retractations is such a plain and evident Discovery of his Unjust and Unfair Proceedings against me whereof the whole second Days Meeting who hath approved his Book is Guilty and of his Ignorance and Perversness of Spirit in Perverting my Words that I see no need to give any other Answer to him or direct to any other Answer either to his Fig-Leaf c. or his Book Keith against Keith or any other his Books but his own very Book and Books compared fairly with my Books Quoted by him and particularly that of my Explications and Retractations yet because I find divers Passages in that Book of his plainly prove him and his Brethren of the second Days Meeting extreamly Erroneous in the great things of the Christian Doctrin some of them being Fundamental therefore I shall take notice of the following Passages partly to give the Reader a tast of his Unfair Dealing towards me and partly to shew his being still Erroneous in some great Fundamentals of the Christian Faith together with his Brethren of the second Days Meeting who have approved his Fig-Leaf In his 19 and 20 Pages he will needs fasten a Contradiction on me That one time by the Flesh of Christ John 6. I mean an inward invisible Substance and the Eating an inward invisible Eating But now in my Retractations I Assert that to believe in Christ as he gave his Body of Flesh outwardly to be broken for us is the Eating of his Flesh as well as the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us And to confirm the Contradiction he Quotes me saying Immed Revel p. 258. This Body of Christ of which we partake is not that which he took up when he came in the Flesh outwardly but that which he had from the beginning Ans First It is no Contradiction to say the Eating of Christ's Flesh John 6. is to believe not by a bare Historical Belief but by a living sincere Faith Wrought in us by the Spirit of Christ that Christ gave his outward Body to be broken for us and also that it is the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us as it is no Contradiction to say Christ is our Intire and compleat Saviour both as he came outwardly in the Flesh Dyed and Rose again c. And as he cometh inwardly by his Spirit into our Hearts and dwelleth in us by Faith And as concerning that Quotation Immed Rev. p. 258. by this Body in that place I did mean that which is only Allegorically called his Body to wit that Middle of Communication above mentioned that is indeed a Spiritual and invisible Substance owned by R.B. as well as by me and many others And I say still this invisible Spiritual Substance in the Saints is not that visible Body of Christ which he assumed when he came in the Flesh outwardly yet this is not to make two Bodies of Christ because the one is called his Body only in a Metaphorical Sense Ans 2. In my Book of Retractations p. 25. I had plainly Retracted and Corrected that Passage in p. 25. Recor. Corr. That by Christ's Flesh and Blood John 6.50 51. He meaneth only Spirit and Life acknowledging that it was at most an Oversight in me but how doth this prove me a Changling in an Article of Faith As he infers very Injurously May not a Man change his Judgment concerning the Sense of a particular place of Scripture without changing an Article of Faith That such a Change may be without a Change in an Article of Faith is acknowledged by all Sober Writers and Expositors of Scripture Yea there are many places of Scripture that some understand one way and others not that way but another and others a third way and yet all have one Faith in point of Doctrin Ans 3. What a Man Retracts in one Book or part of a Book he ought to be understood to Retract the same Passage where it can be found in another Part or Book of his nor ought he to be Charged with Contradiction in what he hath Retracted For as I have formerly said in Print they are only Chargable with Contradictions that without Retractation holds Contradictory Assertions simul semel i. e. both together Page 22. He will not permit me to use that Distinction to say I had not my Knowledge from them viz. The Scriptures as being the efficient Cause but I did not deny that I had my Knowledge by them Instrumentally to wit the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith I had of Gospel Truths he Quibbles upon the Word from as if it could not signifie sometimes the efficient Cause and sometimes the Instrumental whereas a School Boy knoweth that it hath these several Significations and more also And seeing what I then Writ in my Book of Immed Rev. was owned by the Quakers it plainly followeth That according to J.P. the Words of Scripture are not a Means so much as Instrumentally to our Knowledge of the Truths of Christian Doctrin But how will he Reconcile this to W. Penn who doth acknowledge that the Scriptures are a Means to know God Christ and our selves See his Rejoynder p. 115. where he expresly saith We never denied the Scriptures to be a means in God's Hand to Convince Instruct or Confirm By we its plain W. P. meant all the Quakers and consequently G. K. being then owned to be one of them Page 39. He will not allow that what I have Quoted out of my Immed Revel p. 243. to p. 247. proves that I did then hold the Man Christ without us in Heaven to be the Object of our Faith though he grants my Words that I said The Man Christ who Suffered in the Flesh at Jerusalem is the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow into our Souls and that he is to be Prayed unto which he saith none of us
deny And yet with the same Breath as it were he denyeth it for if the Man Christ is to be Prayed unto being the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow unto our Souls surely as such he is the Object of our Faith for how can we Pray to an Object in whom we believe not But seeing he will not allow me that I then owned the Man Christ without us to be the Object of Faith wherein he is most unjust unto me and that I Writ then as a Quaker and my Doctrin was the Quakers Doctrin It is evident that according to him it was not the Quakers Doctrin that the Man Christ without us is in any Part or Respect the Object of our Faith why then doth he and many others Accuse me that I Bely them for saying they hold it not necessary to our Salvation that we believe in the Man Christ without us And it is either great Ignorance or Insincerity in him to say that none of them deny that the Man Christ without us in Heaven is to be Prayed unto Seeing a Quaker of great Note among them William Shewen hath Printed it in his Book of Thoughts p. 37. Not to Jesus the Son of Abraham David and Mary Saint or Angel but to God the Father all Worship Honour and Glory is to be given through Jesus Christ c. This c. cannot be Jesus the Son of Abraham but some other Jesus as suppose the Light within otherwise there would be a Contradiction in his Words so here he Asserts two Jesus's with a witness what saith J. Pennington to this Page 41. In Opposition to my Christian Assertion that the believing Jews before Christ came in the Flesh did believe in Christ as he was to be Born Suffer Death Rise and Ascend and so the Man Christ even before he was Conceived Born c. was the Object of their Faith He thus most Ignorantly and Erroneously Argueth Could that be the Object of theirs viz. The believing Gentiles or of the Jews Faith which our Lord had not yet received of the Virgin which was not Conceived nor Born much less Ascended Ans Yes That can be an Object of Faith and Hope which has not a present Existence but is quid ' futurum something to come though nothing can be an Object of our Bodily Sight or other Bodily Senses but what is in Being and hath a real Existence in the present Time But so Stupid and Gross is he that he cannot understand this that the Faith of the Saints could have a future Object in any Part or Respect this is to make Faith as low and weak a thing as Bodily Sense Is it not generally acknowledged through all Christendom that the Saints of old as Abraham Moses David believed in Christ the Promised Seed as he was to come and be Born and Suffer Death for the Sins of the World according to our Saviours Words Abraham saw my Day and was glad which is generally understood by Expositors that as he saw Christ inwardly in Spirit so he saw that he was to come ' outwardly and be his Son according to the Flesh and by what Eye did he see this but by the Eye of Faith And that Eye of Faith had Christ to come in the Flesh to be Born c. for its Object as a thing to come And in the same Page 41. He Quoteth me falsly saying Immed Rev. p. 132. agreeing with both Papists and Protestants That God speaking in Men is the Formal Object of Faith This Quotation is False in Matter of Fact as well as his Inference from it is False and Ignorant I said in that p. 132. That both Papists and Protestants agree in this That the Formal Object of Faith is God speaking but quoth the Papist it is the Speaking in the Church of Rome no quoth the Protestant God Speaking in the Scriptures is the Formal Object of Faith Here I plainly shew the difference of Papists and Protestants about the Formal Object of Faith though they agree in one Part that it is God Speaking yet in the other Part they differ the Papists making it God Speaking in the Church that is not in every Believer but in the Pope and his Counsel And there in that and some following Pages I Plead for Internal Revelation of the Spirit not only Subjectively but Objectively Working in the Souls of Believers to which Testimony I still Adhere But what then Doth this prove that Christ without us is no Object of our Faith Will he meddle with School Terms and yet understand them no more than a Fool Doth neither he nor his quondam Tutor T. Ellwood understand that the res credendae i. e. The things to be believed are Ingredients in the Material Object of Faith as not only that Christ came in the Flesh was Born of a Virgin but all the Doctrins and Doctrinal Propositions set forth in Scripture concerning God and Christ and all the Articles of Faith are the Material Object of our Faith but the Formal Object of Faith is the inward Testimony of the Spirit moving our Understandings and Hearts to believe and close with the Truth of them All which are well consistent and owned by me Page 43. He Rejects my Exposition of the Parable concerning the lost piece of Money in my late Retractation of my former Mistake p. 15. Sect. 1. p. 10. That by the lost piece of Money is to be understood the Souls of Men as by the lost Sheep and the lost Prodigal To this he most Ignorantly and Falsly opposeth by saying First The Lord can find the Soul without lighting a Candle in it I Answer By finding here is meant Converting the Soul thus the Father of the Prodigal found him when he Converted him to himself this my Son was lost and is found i. e. was departed from God but now is Converted Luke 15.32 And ver 6. I have found the Sheep that was lost Now can this be wrought or doth God Work this Work of Conversion in a lost Soul without his Lighting a Candle in it Secondly He saith the very design of the Parable was to set forth not what God had lost but what Man had lost the Candle being used by Man who needed it not by God and Christ who needed it not How Ignorantly and Stupidly doth he here Argue How can Man use the Candle unless God light it in his Heart and doth not God use it in order to bring or Convert Man to himself It 's true though there were no Candle lighted in Man's Heart God seeth where the Soul is even when it is involved in the greatest Darkness but in order to the Souls Conversion which is principally God's Act it is God that lights the Candle in it and causes his Light to Shine in it And whereas I have said they who Expound the lost Piece of Money to be the Light within will find difficulty to shew what the nine Pieces are which are not lost His Answer to