THis Chapter may be divided into foure parts:

1. Is a Preface the Apostle makes to his Apo­logie, defiring the Corinthians to give him au­dience, and weigh well what he had to say from the [...] to the 6 verse.

2. He answereth to what they had alledged against him; from the 6 to the 13 ver.

3. He makes a little digression, and points out these false Teachers in their colours, from ver. 13 to v. 16.

4. He compares himself with these false Teachers.

1. The ardent, holy love he bare to them, ver. 2. taking his Metaphor from the jealousie in Conjugal relations; he speak­eth as a wooer, though he did not wooe for himselfe, but for Christ; and so explicates this in the next words, For I have espoused you, &c.

2. From the holy feare he had, illustrated by a comparison, what the Serpent was to Eve, the same he will be to you if he can. ver. 3.

3. Verba haec quā ­dam qua [...]i irontā prae se ferre vi­dentur quâ Co­rinthios, novita­tis avidos false ridet, Wein [...]: in loc. If your new Teachers can bring another Christ, a more excellent Gospel, or conferre more excellent gifts of the Holy Ghost, then let them be heard; but since this is impossible, they cannot preach Christ, nor open the Gospel, nor conferre such gifts; therefore hear me, ver. 4.

The same we will say to these Quakers, or any despisers of the Ministers, if they can open the Gospel, can teach Christ, have better gifts than the Ministers, then run after them, but if not, then stay with those who first taught you Christ, the Gospel, &c.

4. I am not onely superiour to these false teachers, but I am equall with the best of the Apostles, therefore hear me, and thus, ver. 5.

From Pauls using thus many Arguments to get audience, observe: When once people have lent their eares to false teachers, they will hardly lend them again to true.

True Teachers must plead hard for their peoples eares, and it is well if they can with intreaties prevaile: it was so then, and to be sure we finde it so now.

2. He answers what they objected against him:

1. They object, that he was rude in speech, ver. 6. He did not lard his Sermons, nor Epistles with Athenian elo­quence, nor flourish with gallant strains of wit: yet surely not so rude as they made him, he could speak so well that ( Act. 14. ver. 12.) the heathens took him to be Mercurius, one of their gods. Well, he answers, am I so rude, but examine me in my knowledge, consider me in all things that are requisite to an Apostle, and so if I have not manifested my self in all things to be a true one.

The same we say to these Quakers, and all others, if by their knowledge, and all things else requisite to Ministers or Apostles, [if there be any more to come, for they tell us they are sent out with an Apostolicall spirit] they can manifest themselves to us to be Ministers, or Apostles, we will listen to them; but by all we can finde in their Books, they scarce appear to be rationall men.

2. The second Objection was, the humility of his person, ver. 7. he abased himself, wrought with hands, taught the Go­spel [Page 3]freely. To this he answers, you need not object this against me, for my humiliation was but your exaltation; for I spared you: but how then maintained? by other Churches, ver. 8, 9. the Churches of Macedonia supplied my wants. But as for you I have not been burdensome to you, neither will I be, ver. 9. to the end. In the Regions of Achaia none shall stop me of this boasting: which he confirms with a kinde of an oath, as Cal­vin, Piscator, Weinrichius, and others judge of the words, As the truth of Christ is in me, ver. 10. as I am a true Minister of Christ: or let me not be esteemed to have any truth. To be sure this is more than Yea, yea, and Nay. Which the Quakers make so much use of.

But why will you take no maintenance of us, it is because you doe not love us? ver. 11. So my enemies may suggest to you, I love the Macedonians, but not you. But this is not so, God knowes, he appeals to God: this is more than Yea, yea again. True here is a weighty case why Paul useth these expressions. But why then will you not &c? I will give you the reason in v. 12. because first I would cut off occasion that is, should I take mainte­nance of all Churches, my enemies your false teachers, would tell you that all my preaching is but for money, profit; but now they cannot say so, for I take nothing of you. Again, your false teachers they glory that they teach freely, they require nothing of you, no more doe I, nor will I in the regions of Achaia: Now you have the Reasons.

Before I goe any further, I have here as fit a place as I could desire (I did not think of it when I chose my Text, but I see Pro­vidence hath fitted a place for me) to take up that great cla­mour which with one mouth all the Quakers make against the Ministery. I must name them all if any, for all their Books are full of it, (and with the Quakers the Separatists) we are no true Ministers; but why? we teach not the Gospel freely as did the A­postles: we preach for hire, divine for money, we are covetous, and much of this strain, divers of their pages have little else but this kinde of stuffe. Thus the silly Women told me in the Church, I was a Hireling, &c.

To all these I answer:

1. False teachers may and have preached freely: then be sure [Page 4]free teaching could not prove us to be true Ministers. Yet the Qua­kers teach not freely, for at one Towne by me, I hear that one of these Quakers had about five pounds gathe­red for him, besides his en­tertainment. This is plain from the Apostle here in ver. 12. for the false teachers did glory in this, and therefore Paul he would teach freely to Corinth, and be even with them in glorying. Thus Parnell, who tells us he is sent from Christ, (if any man could believe him, but the youth thinks others have as few brains as himselfe) he teacheth freely (and well he may:) but this doth not prove him to be a true Teacher, nor none of his Sect, or any other Sect whatever: but he is a false teacher, though a free teacher, as were these: (but [Teacher] is a word he deserves not.)

2 2. It is false, that All the Apostles taught freely, and wrought to maintain themselves. This is plain, 1 Cor. 9.6. in which Chap. the Apostle proves by no lesse than seven Arguments, that the Ministers may take maintenance, ver. 14. speaks as fully as can be, being the winding up of his arguments: Even so hath the Lord ordained, &c. Here is an Ordinance from heaven for the maintenance of right Gospel-Preachers, if the authority of the LORD who made it, be as good as the authority of the Quakers and Separatists, and by vertue of this Ordinance we claim our maintenance. How learnedly the Quakers talke of these argu­ments you shall hear anon. But to come to the 6 ver. Or I onely and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? The word [Onely] plainly carryes it, that the other Apostles, who were married, and were trained up to fishing (divers of them) those did forbear: but what have all the Apostles thus power to leave of, take maintenance, but I onely and Barnabas, &c? No, no, we have the same power as well as they. But ver. 15. I have used none of these things, &c. Again, in the 12 ver. If others be partakers of this power over you, &c. Their own Officers, it seems, or others did take maintenance. So could he.

3 3. It is false also that Paul took no maintenance: for in the 8 & 9 ver. of my Chap: he saith, He took wages of others to serve them, i. e. the Church of Philippi. Paul could take his liberty where he saw cause. If Paul, than we.

4 4. We desire none to speak for us, more than Paul, whom these Quakers object against us: For we have his own example, he did take wages. Secondly, he as moved and guided by Gods Spirit, doth not onely show it is the minde of God, but he [Page 5]proves it also, by divers reasons, 1 Cor. 9. Adde to this, 6 Gal. 6. [...]. Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teacheth, (or catechizeth, as the word properly signifies) in all good things.

Will the Quakers allow this Text to be Scripture? then let Him, be he or she what they will, high or low, Its possible the Quakers will object against the she, but I will let them alone to see if they will doe it. master or ser­vant, is he or she taught; catechized? then communicate in All, what All? this word will not be liked: yea all good things, fit to be communicated, or communicable. So 1 Tim. 5.17. one part of the honour Ministers must have is maintenance, the 18 ver. proves it: marke, it is honorarium, the maintenance of the Elders is not as the pay I give for a servants worke, but it is honour, an honourable maintenance. The same Apostle saith, 2 Tim. 2 4. So 1 Tim 4.15. [...] Be in these things. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the af­faires of this life, &c. But how then shall he live? I shall adde no more, God hath provided for us expressly in the New Testa­ment; though the maintenance we have fall short abundantly of what the Priests had in the Old Test:

5 5. The LORD did never upbraid any Church-Officer for taking tithes or maintenance who did his worke; nor ever thought the worse of for that: nay, how often he blames the people for not bringing in the tithes, Mal. 3.8, 9, 10. and other Texts. The Lord did ever beteame his Ministers honour­able wages Whence you doe but wickedly to upbraid us with those Texts, unlesse you could prove us to be no workers. I doubt not but Christ in glory doth take himself to be faithfully preached by the Ministers of England, (I will not say every one) why then not maintained?

6 6. But observe these Quakers how they provide for them­selves by Scripture. Naylor: Saluta: &c. p. 37. 38. he speaks against the Magistrates because they imprison some of their Sect, calling themselves Pilgrims, and tells them, that God fore­seeing their doings, hath commanded all that own him to entertain strangers, and made a Law for it, which you have made a Law a­gainst, and quotes Levit. 19.34. Heb. 13.2. Observe how they have provided for themselves, when they wander up and down, to mislead souls, and trouble the Churches; yet you must enter­tain them: they have two Scriptures for it. But Naylor;

1. Doe the Spirit that is infallible teach men to lye as you doe against the Magistrate? hath he made a Law against Gods Law in this point? no true stranger will say it but idle persons, Vagabonds, Rogues, persons who worke not in their callings, what should become of the Nation else?

2. Will two Texts serve to prove that Naylor, or others, when they wander up and down, yet they must be entertained, men must provide you lodging, food, &c. and will not five Scri­ptures that speak for Ministers maintenance, be as strong for them to require it? are not the people bound as well to pro­vide for us, as men to entertain you? you are the persons who oppose Gods Law, not the Magistrate. For shame leave off quo­ting of Scriptures thus.

3. But Naylor you might have read a little further, to the 7 & 17 ver: there you shall finde that these Hebrews to whom the Apostle writes, had Rulers over them, and they were to obey them: their duty to entertain strangers, so to have Rulers and obey them: but your Sect, and so others with you are not such as those Hebrews, from whom you fetch your proof, for you rail at those who are such, and at the people who have such.

Thus then by the Quakers principles, I hope we may yet call for our maintenance.

7. Our Lord Christ, who Mat. 10.8. bid his Disciples, that as they had received freely, so give freely: that is, as Christ had freely given them those gifts of healing, &c. by which they might have soon been very rich (the 1 & 8 ver. show what they had received,) yet Luke 10.7. he bids them eat and drinke, for the labourer is worthy of his hire. If they must carry no purse with them, ver. 4. he intended they should be maintained, and shew plainly it was their duty to maintain them; for he could have furnished them with money, but would not.

For Paul, Magd. [...]en [...]. 1. l. 2. p. 451. it plainly appears by Acts 18.3. that though he were brought up to Learning (which at that time was so fa­mous in Tarsus that it excelled Athens, Alexandria, and other Universities, and so Paul was learned, acquainted also with hea­then Poets, as appears) yet withall he was also taught a Trade: he was of the same craft with Aquila, he did not learne it of A­quila then, but before he came Paul had his trade: for Paul [Page 7]being of the Tribe of Benjamin, though he were learned, yet he could not come into the Priesthood, and so had none of the Tythes to maintain him, he must maintain himself. So those El­ders of Ephesus, Act. 20. and other Elders, they all had their trades by which they maintained themselves before ever they heard of the Gospel; then no wonder though Paul, and those Elders did sometimes work: Paul being a single person might easily maintain himself.

2. Paul having the Spirit in that manner, need not trouble himself, to attain any thing needfull to his work; and I doubt not the ordinary Elders at that time, yet had another manner of assistance than we have now, for to have them men so able to teach, and convince gainsayers, Tit. 1. these gifts could not be reached so quickly: but though they did labour and study for them, yet the Spirit might assist more than now he doth for the speedy fitting of persons.

3. It was a free act in Paul that he for this time upon some reason moving him did suspend his power, 1 Cor. 9.12. if he were absolutely bound to it, why not others also? v 6. So if any now who have means sufficient for themselves and their poste­rity will preach freely they may: but neverthelesse there re­mains a duty on the peoples part to maintain them, as such that preach the Gospel, v. 14. though they be otherwayes able to live. Neither hath the Scripture given any such caution, that if Mi­nisters have good estates of their own, then the people should not give them the double honour. Though the Priests were never so rich, yet that did not hinder them from taking Tythes. Though Kings have great Lands, yet the people pay Customes. So in any other Art, or place whatever men are in; for the reason holds, The labourer is worthy, &c.

But what are these things to us? when first, our fitnesse to this work is not so easily attained; those Languages wherein the Scriptures were writ, which cost us much time to attain to, as without which no man can be a good Text-man, they never bestowed any paines about. The customes to which the Apostles allude often, they knew them because their own, but we cannot till we read and know them by Learning. The Errors which Ministers are to oppose, are abundantly multiplyed over they [Page 8]were in the Apostles time; thus I might speak for the necessity of Arts, without which men cannot be sufficient Ministers, all things put together prove, that he who will be a Minister, had need give his whole time; let him study, and pray, as bard as he will; let him live a hundred years in his strength, yet he that will be a Minister indeed, will say he finds all little enough: if it were no more to be a Minister but to step off a shop-board, and get into a Pulpit, and speak some honest practicall things, which people have heard from others, and know something it may be from their own experience, then it were easie work in­deed, and well might the people grumble at the maintenance of such. Hence we see Paul in his Epistle to Timothy who was not bred up, as others, he must give himselfe wholly to these things, Chap. 4. ver. 15. not entangle himselfe with the affairs of this life. Chap. 2. ver. 4. Then must Timothy be maintained by the Church, or beg, if he have not enough of his own estate to keep him.

2. Is your offence at Tithes?

1 First, it is well known if the Magistrate (who is to doe what in him lieth, that the people under him may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty, 1 Tim. 2.2. why else should the people pray that they might doe so; and to this end takes care that according to Gods Institution, Ministers be pro­vided who may teach the people all godliness & honesty, he in the mean time a Nursing Father to them, Isa. 49. see that they may have an honourable maintenance according to the word: I say if the Magistrate) could finde a better way for the main­tenance of the Ministery every way, you shall see how easily Ministers will part with Tithes. But now we take them as that which the Supreme power of the Nation for many yeares have allotted to us.

2 You have the least cause to be offended at Tithes, because Tithes are no mans owne, but the Ministers many hundred years since the Parliament of England (not the Pope, as learned Parnel saith in his books) did set apart the Tithes, for the main­tenance of the Ministery, and the supreme Magistrate is but the Feoffee in trust, to see that what the people of England in their representative, with the King and house of Lords, had given to [Page 9]the Ministerie, be duly payed them; let this convince you (if your hearts be sober) that Tythes are no mans owne, but the Ministers; for let a man be to hire a Farme, his Landlord can­not let him a Farme that shall pay no Tythes; let a man buy a Farme, or sell a Farme, he can neither buy nor sell a Farme that shall pay no Tythes; if a man have a Farme to sell of an hun­dred pound per annum, this Farme may possibly pay twelve pound a yeare for tythes, if this man could fell this farme tythe­free, would he not raise the price in the sale of it accordingly? So, would not Landlords let their farmes accordingly, if they could let them tithe-free? the Tenant should soon finde it: But neither the Landlord, nor Tenant, doe look upon the tythes as theirs, but the Ministers; whence men let, hire, buy, sell lands as still looking upon them to pay tythes, and so none of all these are wronged at all: whence tythes are as duly our own, as any mans estate is his; and that is the reason why when people deny our due, we go to the supreme Magistrate (who, as I said, is the Feoffee in trust) in his Officers, and Courts, to help us to our due, as any other man wronged, goeth for right to any Court; whence it is evident, it is meer blindnesse, (if not madnesse) which makes people talk thus against Ministers taking of Tithes, for we take onely what is our own, and no mans else.

As for lands, so for houses, we observe the long Parliament made two Acts (it may be more that I know not of) one for Bristoll, another for Colchester, that according to the rents of houses, so men should pay, not exceeding a certain summe, (a very little one I am sure.) I know wicked spirits raile at the Magistracie for doing this: but herein the Parliament did what was equal and just before God and man: For (as I said in my first) if the Magistrate be bound to take care that the people under him doe lead a life in all godlinesse &c. which com­prehends the first Table of the Law, then the Magistrate must set up able men (no slight fellowes) that may answer the quali­fications in the Word, to teach the people; then reason, besides the Word, saith these must be fed, maintained, and that as be­come their places, surely the Magistrate who hath power to raise a taxe, when the good of the Common-wealth requires it, hath as much power to cause people to pay towards the up­holding [Page 10]of the Officers, and Ordinances of God, unlesse Reli­gion doe nothing concern the interest and good of the Com­mon-wealth, which to affirm is to fall below Heathenisme.

As for such as affirm that the Magistrate hath nothing to doe in the Church; the care of it doth not at all belong to him. I think such devilish principles deserve not an answer, (yet they are answered) though such owne not the Scriptures; yet let them but go to the Heathens, and they will shame them.

3 3. It is well known there are abundance of Ministers, who take not their tythes in kinde, but compound with the people for their tythes: I would faine see the enemies of the Ministers prove that ever the Priests in the old Law, could doe such a thing: then still we take not our Tythes as the Priests. All Ministers would doe thus, would people be reasonable in their compositions; but we finde they defraud us.

4 4. For Tythes, it is impossible that the Supreme power should ever settle a more equall and easie way for the mainte­nance of the Ministery, than this way of Tythes, already set.

1. Not more equall: for therein we rise and fall with the people, we share with their blessings, and crosses; we have little or more, as they have little or more.

2. Not more easie: because, as I said, neither the buyer, nor seller, neither he that hires, nor he that lets, doe look on Tythes as theirs, and is it a burden for men to pay for what is none of their own, and they esteem none of their own? as in my second I have opened.

Object. But you should trust God, for your maintenance.

Answer. So we doe, and desire to doe, but we will not, nor dare trust you: if your corruption be touched, or your rotten opinion be opposed, if your covetous lust stirre (and that reigns) what is next? we must seek for maintenance.

2. We see God hath taken care for us already, many hun­dred years before we were born, in setling an estate upon us by the Supreme power of the Nation.

3. You would have done well, had you lived in the Primi­tive Churches, when the Magistrate was an Heathen, and so took no care for the Church but to destroy it; but yet even then they were so free to maintain the Officers, and Ordinances [Page 11]of Christ, &c: that they could have Church stocks, to maintain all with, the poor, the sick, strangers; yet then were Bishops besides Presbyters; and none of these were to meddle with Secular cares, for if they did, they were to be cast out; Can. Apost. 7.80. as the Canons then made declare. Had that spirit that is now amongst professors, been in those dayes, it had been very ill with the Church, as it is now, and should be worse might such Christians have their wills.

To gather up all then: since Christ in his word, hath com­manded that we should be maintained; since the Magistrate being Christian, hath long since appointed us maintenance, and that such as none can call his own, but the Ministers, are we the covetous persons who require that which is our due by the Law of God and Man, or are you the covetous persons, yea and sacrilegi­ous, who deny it? Certainly if people were not acted by a very Satanicall spirit they could not thus open their mouthes, in such base language against us, as they doe. Why doe you not charge us rather with idlenesse, if you can, and so in that respect prove we ought not to be maintained? Why doe you not speak a­gainst the Impropriators? You pay tythes to them without such clamours, onely the Ministers are they who trouble you; but we know whose hand is in all this, Hell and Rome would be glad if your designes might prevaile.

So much for the Ministers maintenance, which because my Chapter gave me so fit an occasion, I have first answered.

The third part of the Chapter, contains a description of these false teachers, and adversaries to Paul: 1. He calls them false-Apostles. 2. Deceitfull Workers. 3. They transforme them­selves, &c. like stage-players, they personate the Apostles of Christ.

But how can this be? (say the admirers of these false teach­ers) we cannot believe it. The Apostle answers, yes this may very easily be, and proves it à majore. Doe not wonder at this, for Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of light, which are the words of my Text, and but the antecedent part of the Enthymeme, the consequent part is in the 15 verse: Satan is, ergo his Ministers, &c. Parnel severall times in his Book (he entitles, the Watcher:) calls Logick, filthy Logick: & pag: 30. [Page 12]tells us what Logick is: Logick is onely to make a false word true. That is thy masters Logick indeed Parnel, Satans, but the true Logick we own, (for to give you a definition of Logick is in vain) is that whereby the Lights of your master Satan, are by the help of the Scripture, discovered to be false. But why doth thy mouth call that filthy, which the pure Spirit of God useth? In these words he useth both parts of Logick, Invention and Disposition. We use no Logicke but such as God himselfe hath made.

SATAN, [...] Adversari, odio [...]abere. the Adversary, the hatefull enemy of mankinde, is transformed: what is he got on the stage too, and put on the robe of an Angel of Light? Surely a Tragedy we must expect.

1. Properly, he that hath his sight knows what we mean when we speak of light; to have any Philosophicall discourse about it, is neither profitable, nor proper to my Text.

2. Improperly, it is taken several wayes, I shall name but a few and leave the rest: 1. For the true and saving doctrine of the Word, Prov. 6.23. Psal. 119.105. 2. For knowledge, Acts 26.18. Isa. 60.3. 3. For good works, Mat. 5.16. 4. For joy and comfort, Psal. 97.13. 5. For Christ, Isa. 42.6. Ioh. 8.12. I name no more, I shall make use of some of these; the Obser­vation is plain: ‘ Observ: Observ: It hath been of old, and it is the practice still of the Prince of darknesse, to transforme himself into an An­gel of Light.’ Good Angels did use to appear lightsome and glorious unto persons; well, Satan will doe as they doe. Cor: à Lap: upon this Text tells us many stories of persons to whom Satan thus ap­peared in a visible shape, they saw him, and conversed with him, as if he had been an Angel of Light, and they discerned him by his discourse to be but the black Prince transformed: but this is not the thing Paul chiefly means; he hath another way to act, when he went to Ahabs prophets, and perswaded them, it is more than I know that he appeared visibly to them; some Polititians will doe much, and yet are little seen, I am sure it is so with him: Light useth to discover things, but never is Satan lesse seen than when he acts as an Angel of Light. This hath [Page 13]been his practise of old, and I am sure he hath not layd down his trade now in our dayes, he hath found so much successe by this policy towards the advancement of his kingdome, that so long as Christs Church is upon the earth, and hath rest from persecution, till he come to be bound up, we must look for him in this shape.

For the doctrinall part I will dispatch it briefly, because I will make hast to what I ayme at: I have but two things to open:

• 1. How doth Satan thus transforme himselfe, how doth he worke, what garments (as the word is taken from Stage players, that put on garments sutable to the per­son they act) puts he on, that make him appear thus?
• 2. Whence comes it, that he doth thus?

For the first:

1. By taking the Scriptures, which are the true light, and ma­king use of them, for the doctrine he would have received: if Satan would have any errour take, he must not fetch his proof, his light from a Turkish. Alcoran, or Plato, or Aristotle, &c. these have no Authority in the Church: no, no, he will bring his Scripture, that which is called the Lamp and the Light, to you, is not here Scripture? Search the Scriptures, yea so he doth, and can bring Christ Scripture also: if Christ answer him, and turns him off with a For it is written, Mat. 4.4. the very next tentation he will prove with a For it is written, ver. 6. He seems to be even with Christ, and what he quotes is to the pur­pose, so much as he quotes. Clothes, Bayes, &c. use to have seales hung upon them, then they passe for currant: when he can hang the seales of Scripture upon his doctrines, who will now question them? Hath not this been the practise of him in all the Hereticks since Christ his time? Credunt scriptu­ris ut credant adversus seri­pturas, Ter [...]ul. p. 77. had not the Arians Scripture? Hath not the Pope Scripture? Have not the Socinians Scripture? though Reason is their Rule, yet hath not Crellius at last found our Scripture against Christs Divinity? The least Scripture that I know any errour or practise have to prove it selfe, is the practise of the Separatists (with these Qua­kers) who have cast off the soundest Ministers, and all our Churches. It is observable how these Quakers, who have done [Page 14]the most mischief to the Separatists and the Anabaptists socie­ties doe tell them, they are in Babylon; that which they have cast upon us is now cast upon them, and will be as easily proved against them, as they can prove it against us.

2 2. When he becomes a Preacher of righteousnesse, good works, these are called light, Mat. 5. should he preach, that men should whore, swear, (when not justly called to it) lye, steale, be drunk, &c. though men love these deeds of darkness, yet should they hear them taught as things that ought to be done, though their hearts love the actions, yet their judgments would conclude, this were no true light: whence observe the next verse to my Text, they are transformed as the Ministers of righteousnesse, not Ministers of unrighteousness, he will hold equipage in many things at least. Thus these Quakers, because they taught people, they must deale justly, doe no body wrong, not lye, &c. Some of the people took it for granted these Teach­ers came from Christ, (as they told me) and why doe not we come from Christ as well, for I hope they have heard the same from us and more? (but this was the businesse, we were Priests, and divined for money because maintained.)

3 3. When not onely he will be a Teacher of righteousnesse, but also of higher degrees of mortification and holinesse than other men doe teach, and most Christians practise: not that it is mortification or holinesse, but it seems to be so: as the 2 Coloss [...]ult: that which answers the rule is holinesse and morti­fication. Thus the Fryers and others of that Popish generati­on, by their course habit, hard lodging, fasting, abstaining from marriage, One of this Sect, n [...]e [...] me, burnt up tenne pounds worth of lace, ground­ing her act up­on Act. 19.19. &c. these have a shew, saith the Apostle. Thus the Quakers must wear no lace, drink water, (before others, at least one of their teachers did) fast. J. Toldervy tells us, he knew some who fasted 30 dayes, the sincerity of their discourse a­gainst sin, and sebriety in their appearance took with him. Who would suspect a Devil in these, to teach things thus crosse to the flesh, to deny our naturall appetites? Yes even here he is, for all his specious shewes; if it be a thing crosse to God, to set up some way of our own, we can then crosse our selves: so true is that which blessed Herbert in another case hath said, [Page 15]

Christ could not be in the Pharisees esteem a Teacher of righ­teousnesse, Matth. 11.19. He is a man gluttonous, and a wine­bibber, &c. God alloweth us to take comfort in the creature after a Christian manner, Eccles. 5.18, 19. with many Scriptures which shew the practises of the Saints that they did so.

4 4. When he can begu [...]e some who may be truly the children of light, hath got some of them in; these are the Duck-coyes to draw in others. Loe! you who follow these teachers, who are taken? not the rascality of the Countrey, as Christ had Publi­cans and sinners to attend on him, sometimes, but there are such men, and such women, whom all know to be godly per­sons: would they countenance, and follow such if they were were unsound? This hath been alledged to me, as a proof on the Quakers side, because such men entertained them: this be­comes a great stumbling block. I shall speak a word to this af­terwards.

5 5. When he can get into mens consciences, (a tender thing that must not be touched) and plead that for their rule and refuge: for a man to follow the dictates of a true inlightned conscience, and to have a true tender conscience is very good; but how often gets he in here, our miserable dayes have proved sufficiently. The Quakers cry up conscience very much, calling men to attend more to that, than to the Scriptures, (as anon I shall shew) but it is manifest that Satan is got into their con­sciences.

6 6. When from true light he will draw dark conclusions, this is not true Logick, for ex vero nil nisi verum, but it is such Lo­gick as he useth, hath done of old; where sin hath abounded, the grace of God abounded. What then? thus now; men are not to take up their rest in the Ordinances, but to look beyond Ordi­nances, Christ is the end of Ordinances, as in Baptisme, the Supper, &c. What then? hence the Quakers and others tell us they have got Christ, (the thing signified) what should they doe with signes? so cast away the Ordinances: they are grown so Spirituall, that they live above these Carnall, (as Naylor calls the Ordinances) things. There is some light in the Antecedent, [Page 16]and as much darknesse in the Consequent part, for the conse­quence is false.

7 7. And this shall be the last: when to the Light of his do­ctrine, he addeth the Light of comfort, helping the heart to spirituall joyes, quiet, and ease: this he is as good at, as at the other: it is that which he cōmonly welcomes people withall in­to his by-paths, when he hath drawn them out of the right way. Some could never finde comfort while they attended upon the Black coats, but off and on was the best they had: since they have cast them off, and gone into their new wayes, now they are stablished, comforted, and setled for ever. This he can doe two wayes, (but I intend not to enlarge.)

First, by withdrawing those tentations, doubts, scruples, which he threw before into their mindes, making a cessation: as also by drawing them off from the quick searching power of the word, which coming close, made conscience to jog them, and trouble their false bottomes where they would be resting.

2. By false application of the Promises, in which this Teacher hath an admirable skill;as he can sinke the honest heart with misapplying of some terrible Texts, so he can as well cheer a false heart, with the misapplication of comfortable promises: what his skill is in this, I have opened upon other Texts.

So much for the first Question. The second I will dispatch also in a few heads. Whence comes it, or why doth he thus trans­form himself? &c.

The Reasons may be taken, First, from himself. Secondly, from God.

1. From himselfe: because this is the way for him to attaine his ends. Could he doe the mischiefe he doth in the Church where the Candle is burning, Light shining, if he did not put on this garb? No verily; this is a notable way for him to lead people into darkness, by light: should he come into the Church with his Wolves skin, he might scare the Sheep, they would run from him, but not follow him. When I was coming from Spaine into England, we had two sheep aboard our ship, which were bought that we might have fresh meat by the way: when one of the sheep was killed, the Sea-men put the skin of the sheep over the dogge which belonged to the ship; the sheep [Page 17]that was left alive, would continually follow the dogge, where the dogge lay down, the sheep would lye down by him, and would not leave the dogge though the dogge would guerne at the poor sheep; but thus the sheep would not doe before. Thus Satan must doe, if he will have any sheep follow him, he must get on his sheeps skin, and so he hath done, we see the effect. Thus his enmity against Christ in his kingdome, against the comfort and peace of the true members of the Church, against the soules of people is driven on, Revel. 20.3. Deceive the Na­tions: A Deceiver is not the person he is taken to be; no more is this Angel of Light, who works by deceit.

2. God hath his ends in this: it is not his pleasure that Satan should ever be an Angel of Light again, but it is his pleasure (I know no false Divinity in the word) that Satan should have li­berty to transform himself into an Angel of Light.

First, what terrible ends he had in giving Satan commission to goe to Ahabs prophets, in sending strong delusions, 2 Thes. 2.11. the Texts declare: and certainly there are the same reasons still, when people have lived under light, but they love it not, secret rottennesse lye at bottome, they love darknesse, they shall have Lights at last, which shall sute their principles, and cer­tainly lead them to what they love, and that freely.

2 Secondly, he doth by such providences try and make disco­very even of his own people, Deut. 13.3. A Prophet riseth up, giveth a signe, and the signe comes to passe, who would not fol­low him? take heed, I doe it to prove you. How much miserable ignorance and vanity of heart have these times discovered: wherein Satan hath thus acted even in those who gave hopes, and we dare not absolutely deny but they may belong to God: those who we hoped had been men, have discovered themselves to be children, yea the weakest of children carried about with every winde of doctrine.

3 Thirdly, he doth exercise his owne who doe stand: here is room for patience, watching, studying, prayer: I believe there is more discouragement upon the spirits of sound Ministers and Christians, than there was in those former dayes, which they so much prayed against and are answered. Now our hearts (but why doe I measure other mens hearts by my own) doe even [Page 18]dye, the Spirit of prayer is gone; and what can we look for, but a su [...]table reward to our abused liberty? More heads I could have added, and enlarged, but I have done with the doctrinall part.

Ʋse. For Uses I will make but one, for time will not let me handle more. Let people then look to their Lights; be they Lights of doctrine, or of comfort, the Prince of darknesse is transformed into an Angel of Light, he walks in the Churches, he that ta­keth light from him will be sure to finde it end in darknesse; take heed that you be not deceived.

Answ: 1. It is true, and are you Elect? doe you know it so certainly upon grounds infallible, (not imaginary) that you are one of them? I think we must goe backwards, to prove Electi­on, by the effects which the execution of that Decree produ­ceth: One which I am sure is to make the Elect vessel carefull what doctrines it receiveth.

2. An Elect vessel cannot be deceived so as to misse of sal­vation, yet he may take such courses and goe in those pathes which in themselves would lead him to perdition, (after effectu­all calling I meane) but that the mercy of the Lord fetch him back by repentance out of them.

3. An elect Vessel may be so farre deceived, as to dishonour God exceedingly, grieve the Spirit of God, wound the hearts of the children of God, which should not, nay cannot be small things in the eyes of one who is indeed Elect.

4. Though an elect Vessel cannot be deceived as to ruine his soule, yet he may be so farre deceived as to lead others also into deceitfull pathes, and may be truely an occasion why they lose their soules. God may show the Elect mercy, and recall them, but not those it may be whom the Elect hath mislead.

And here look to it ye Separatists, that have cast off the Mi­nistery with so much scorne, at your dore must lye the cause why so many persons are turned Quakers; you now rise up against them, (some of you) but the people that hear you and them argue, tell us, you are run down, you cannot answer them, and no wonder. But who may it thank that so many are car­ried [Page 19]away into such vile errours, as your selves can judge? onely your selves; while the people kept to Gods Institutions, wait­ing upon Officiall preaching, there was no such doings. Whi­ther come these Quakers? but to Townes where you dwell, and have drawn away the people from the Ministery, there these Foxes finde their preyes. Had the people kept close to the Mi­nistery, they had been preserved from these miscarriages, and been in the way, God useth to save by, but now they are gone.

Quest. But how shall we know this transformed Angel of Light, how discern him?

Answ: This is a hard thing, because an Angel of Light: Angels doe excell man in wisdome abundantly, whence we may well thinke it is not easie to finde him out. When David asked the woman of Tekoah whether Joabs hand was not with, &c. She answers, My Lord (not Thou man, as the Quakers) is wise according to the wisdome of an Angel of God: I may say, that man had need have wisdome neer to the wisdome of those true Angels of Light, who would be able to discover all the falshoods of this transformed Angel of Light, both in doctrine, and in com­forts, &c. As for the Light of comfort it is not my purpose to touch that here, I intend onely the Light of doctrine: and truly the generation I am now to take in hand, are so grosse, that an ordinary assistance of Gods Spirit is enough to discover these, to whom now I shall addresse my self: and because I am to speak to plain people, and to those onely I intend this Sermon, (because that sort is so mislead) I shall desire them but to observe this:

First, I lay down that which I know is the Light of Christ: which I call the Major Proposition.

Secondly, I lay down the doctrine of the Quakers, as being quite crosse to that Light, which I call the Minor Proposition: and because I would not wrong the Quakers I write down their own words, out of their own Books, with the page where you may finde them, if you have the books: so that when you see Major or Minor you may know what I am proving; if I doe prove the Major to be the Light of Christ, and the Quakers be crosse to that Light, then the Conclusion is you may be sure the Quakers light come from Satan transformed &c.

Major. The Major is thus proved, because the light of Christ will ad­mit of, and endure the triall: as, Take Christ himself, who is the Light of the world, if the question be, whether he be the Christ? he will come to the triall, Ioh. 5.39. He had others to bear witnesse of him, in the verses before, but he offers himself to be tried by the Scriptures, Search the Scriptures, for they are they which testifie of me. If you doe finde that I answer not those Scriptures which speak of the Messiah, throw me by: who of his enemies could by the Scripture-triall finde him to be false? So Ioh. 10.37, 38. If I doe not the works of my Father, believe me not. &c. Thus Mat. 115. when Iohn sent to him, his answer is the proof, Tell Iohn what you hear and see. i. e. The prophesie in Isa. 35.6. fulfilled; then let Iohn (or you rather) judge what I am. Thus Paul, 2 Cor. 12.12. Truly the signes of an A­postle were wrought among you in all patience, in signes, and won­ders and mighty deeds. I gave you sufficient proof that I was an Apostle, by all the signes of a true Apostle. Thus Isaiah 8.20. teach the people how to try all false spirits, bring them To the Law and to the Testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Let them talke of their Lights what they will, if they speak not according to this word (the touchstone for all spirits) they are but delusions.

Our Major then is true light, according to the Scriptures.

Minor. The Minor: But the light of the Quakers will not admit of, nor endure the triall. This I prove from their own Books.

Whether that can be the way of God, which hath nothing to warrant it but the bare words and affirmation of men, which they call infallible?

Answ: That Spirit of God which is infallible is the sufficient ground; and to preach, that is the way of God, neither had this ever any other testimony, but what is of it selfe: For the worlds wis­dome, and carnall naturall man, can neither receive it, nor beare testimony of it, onely such who believe it, &c. The summe is this, the Quakers have the Infallible Spirit, they believe the testimo­ny of it: and this is all the proof.

But could not CHRIST, who is the Light of the world, an­swer thus more truely than any Quaker? what need then of searching Scriptures, or observing his works, his infallible Spirit is proof enough. Could not Paul say as much, he had the in­fallible Spirit, and what need of the signes of an Apostle?

Could not those Apostles, Rev. 2.2. whom the Angel of Ephesus tried, have said as much, they had the infallible Spirit, and if this were proof enough, how could the Angel try them?

Zedekiah can say, Thus saith the Lord, 1 King. 22.11. and smite Micaiah on the cheek, &c. ver. 24. Hananiah can say, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Jer. 28.2. And if their saying, they have the infallible Spirit, be proof sufficient, then they are as good Prophets as Micaiah or Ieremiah.

God will not judge mens doctrines or conversations accord­ing to their infallible spirit (which they boast of) at the last day, but according to his Law, written or not written, (as the Hea­then had not the Law written, but yet the Law they had) Rom. ch. 2.12. then by the same Law now try and judge Doctrines and Conversations. The Quakers shall be judged by the Law written.

Conclusion. Since then the Quakers light will not admit of, nor endure the triall, hence we conclude the Quakers light is the light of Satan, not of Christ.

By the Light of Nature, Major pro­ved. I mean, that Candle, or inward Law which God set up in the heart of all mankinde after the losse of his Image in the Pall, checking many sinnes against God, but more against men, God having made a fuller and greater reve­lation to Nature in the things of the second Table, than in the first. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steale, &c. So, Honour thy father and thy mother; with­out this light, no Societies could hold: but Christ his Light doth not put out any part of this Light: no, we finde him Matth 5. opening these Commandements in a larger sense than the Pha­risees did.

Minor. But the Light of the Quakers puts out part of this Light, For, they deny honour to all Superiours; yea, nor will own any distinction of Relations.

Honour is but the expressing of the inward respect we bear to persons, by outward signes, speeches, and gestures; without the outward signification of it thus, no man can tell who is honour­ed: and as is the custome of the Nation, so we expresse this, whether by uncovering the head, bowing the body, &c. But the Quakers deny this. Let a Master be in a house, with ten other boyes, the servant comes in, he stirres not his hat to his Master, no more than to the boyes; his language to his Master is, Thou man; to the boy, Thou boy: what honour hath the Master a­bove the Boyes?

I. N. against F. Harris, pag. 6. Did ever any Saints use any other language but Thee and Thou, to God or man?

Yes that they did, better Saints than the Quakers are, though they say they are perfect.

Paul was a Saint, Acts 26.25. He saith not, Thou Festus, or Thou man; but Most noble Festus: so, King Agrippa.

Daniel was a Saint, yet when he speaks to Nebuchadnezzar, Dan. 2.37. he saith, O King, thou art a King of Kings!

Hannah was a Saint; when she speaks to Eli, 1 Sam. 1.15. no, My Lord. ver. 26. Oh my Lord! not Thou man.

Sarah was a Saint; 1 Pet. 3.6. she called Abraham, Lord.

Rachel, if the Quakers can prove her to be no Saint let them, but she to Laban, Gen. 31.35. My Lord, and rose up; there is language and gesture.

Solomon rose up from his Throne, went to meet his Mother, and bowed himself to her, &c. 1 King. 2.19. Reade also Prov. 31.28.

Eliazer is a good servant, yet in his prayer to God, Gen. 24.12. O Lord God of my Master Abraham.

Abraham was a Saint, Gen 18.2. when he saw three men, (as he thought) he bowes himself: in ver: 3. his language is, My Lord. So Abigail to David.

Yea, they will acknowledge no Relations. I. Toldervy, when he was of that number, relates of himself, pag: 17. that he took his Master by the arme or cloake, and bade him sit down Wil­liam Webbe; not Master, nor pulling off the hat. Afterwards saith he, I denyed all relations, from the words of One, He that liveth in the light will see no difference. And in pag 16. he tells, ‘how through his disobedience (from this principle) his Mo­ther and many little ones doe suffer, having in his charge the redeeming part of an estate for his Mother, possibly in a short time to have been effected, which he deserted: and addes, the workings of this power was so predominant, that I refu­sed the least acknowledgment, much lesse performance of duty to any.’

Parnel. Goliahs head &c. p. 68. speaking about Ornaments, Moderation in every thing I owne, but what is wast is for the lust. both in Kings, Princes, and great Personages (as thou callest them) but with us there is no respect of persons.

Conclusion. Since then the Light of the Quakers doe put out this Light of Nature, I conclude, their Light is the Light of Satan, not of Christ.

The Scriptures are left by God to be our Light and our Rule, Major pro­ved. Prov. 6.23. Psal. 119.105. The Prophets bid us goe to them, Isa. 8.20. Christ bids us search them, Ioh. 5.39. The men of [Page 24] Berea. Act. 17.11. Tried Paul by these; for Paul to tell them of his infallible Spirit, and so they might believe him without searching the Scriptures, he had as good say nothing: those men were commended for this action. Apollos a mighty man in the Scriptures, Acts 18.24. convinced the Jewes by the Scri­ptures, ver. 28.

Minor. But the Light of the Quakers teach men to forsake the Scriptures, setting up a Spirit in man, which shall not be examined by the Scriptures.

If you aske me before I goe to the proof, Doe the Quakers cast off the Scriptures? I answer, when they can finde any thing which they think make against us, then they will urge the Scri­ptures very much; Golich. p. 63. yea, they will run to the Apocrypha rather than faile to help themselves, as Parnel to evade the strength of Levit. 19 32. runs to Chap. 4 of the Booke of Wisdome, v. 8, 9. but mistakes. Yea further, when Satan hath gotten strong hold of persons in their way, yet he will then provoke them to reade the Scriptures much, but casteth strange glosses upon the Scri­pture, p. 21. 21. as I. Told: confesseth when he was in that snare. Herein he worketh like an Angel of Light. But to speake truely, the Quakers make nothing of the Scriptures, miserably abusing that text, 2 Cor. 3.6. You shall hear them speak:

1. I. Toldervy, p. 6. reporteth of that Quaker who was the means of his seducing; that he, expressed with firme confidence, that searching of the Scripture was not the way to finde out the knowledge of Christ, but the turning the minde to within: quite crosse to Christ, why did not Christ bid them turn to that?

2. Mason, pag 12. in his defence of Craven: Thou sayest (to his Opponent) the Old and New Testament is thy rule, the same was writ for thy imitation. He answers, But did Paul or any of the Aposlles walke by any literall rule, or was not their rule a [...]asure of the Spirit of God committed to every one of them? but it were well if these pecuniary Priests would walke answerable to the precepts left upon record in the Letter. By this you may see what Mason makes of the written Word.

3. Parnel. Watcher, pag. 8. where you may have a learned discourse how the profession of the Christian Faith & Religion came into England, two pages before. Let those who are igno­rant [Page 25]read it. But p. 8. he addes, and those had the writings of the Prophets and Apostles which is called Scripture, and so was the Keepers of the Letters, and that they took to be their rule to walke by, as they doe now, but knew not that which gave it forth, to lead them unto the life, but had the letter and the forme. To the same purpose he speaks, p 40. and in his Goliah, p 77.

4. Naylor against I. Reyner, p. 3. speaking against us, hath these words, Whose Law is without, Light without, their Word without, their Church without, Baptisme, Prayers without; All which we witnesse to bee within. Farewell then the written Word.

Naylor, Saluta: &c. p. 29. tells those that will follow their doctrine, then you shall not have your Light and Life to seek in a Book without you, &c.

Naylor against F. Harris, p 9. speaks out, The Infallible Spi­rit, by which the Scriptures were given forth is the sole tryer of spirits and doctrines, neither hath it need of any addition where it is: you bring the letter to oppose Christ, and so deny the end of the Scriptures, which is to see up the Spirit of God for Judge, and not themselves, &c. So then the Scriptures must not judge of his Spirit, but your spirit is Judge of the Scriptures.

5. Priests Ignorance, p. 4, 5.

The summe is this, it is all one to them, Scriptures or no Scri­ptures; for they have the Spirit that did give forth the Scri­ptures. As for the written Word, you see how they contemn it, and condemn those who make it their rule to walke by: when they doe use it, it is at the pleasure of their infallible spirit what shall be the meaning of it. Here I will give you a taste of their spirit.

Parnel entitles one of his Books the Watcher, and tell us in his Title-page, of the stone, that struck the feet of the Image, quoting Dan. 2.31, 32 &c. By this title we shall [...]pect some great matter about the Image, p. 21, 22. It is one thing to allude to a scripture, an­other thing to inte [...]pret it, as doth Parnel, here. his spirit interprets the Image. Now the head of the Image which is of gold, and (are) those that have had a light shining into them, and have seen the emptinesse of many Forms, and have gotten the thing in their comprehension: (with more of this stuffe, which I am loath to transcribe) and the breast of the Image which is of silver, and [Page 26]the thighs of brasse are the rest of the sects and forms, and the legs of the Image which is of iron is the beast, and the feet of the Image which is part of iron, part of clay, are the Priests and Pha­risees, joyned to the powers of the earth, &c. But Parnel, the Spi­rit in Daniel gave another Interpretation of this Image in the same Chapter, and we have seen it fulfilled in the greatest part; How darest thou then set down thy Interpretation thus crosse to his? Oh that any Christians should admit such a Fellow into their houses!

Let us hear Deusbury's spirit interpreting Revel. pag. 20. 17. Babylon is within you, the Beast is within you, which all the world wonders after (what a wonder is this, I hear there is a Doctour of Divinity in London hath given the same interpretation of this Beast, &c. that all the world should wonder after that which none of the world ever saw!) is your wills: your wisdome is the great Whore that sits upon the Beast. But why doe you stay here Deusbury, goe on to 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, verses, and tell us what they are? when you have done, turn to the last clause of the 19 ver. of the 1 Chap. and 1 ver. of the 4. Chap. there see how neatly your spirit have interpreted this 17 Chap. John was shown things that were to be hereafter: but it seems there were no such wills, hearts, nor wisdome before Iohn, but all the wickednesse of men was to be after Iohn. Is this the best Interpretation your spirit can make?

Conclusion. Since then the Quakers Light teach men to forsake the Scri­ptures, and set up a spirit in man which shall not be examined by the Scriptures: Hence I conclude the Quakers Light is the Light of Satan, &c.

The Quakers divide the Spirit from the Scriptures.

Major. The Major is clear: For if the same infallible spirit gave out all the parts of the Scripture, then to have one Scripture plainly and truely to contradict another, and that in things known by the Light of Nature, would argue high imperfection in the Spirit of God: which is blasphemy to impute unto him.

Minor. But the Quakers Light doe make the Scripture crosse it self. and that in things known by the Light of Nature.

Thus all the Quakers, and Bishop in particular, p. 24. quotes the 2 of Iames to overthrow all respect to persons. Then where is the honouring of Parents, and Superiours, as in my second Ar­gument I opened. The very first verse will give the meaning of the Apostle, Have not the Faith of the Lord Iesus &c. with re­spect of persons. If you like the faith of our Lord Jesus when it is in a rich man, but despise it in a poor man, this is sinfull: yet there are good reasons to be given from the 6 & 7 ver. that the rich man S. Iames mentions was not a believer, but rather an Heathen; and to have a rich Heathen preferred before a poor Believer is sinne: however take the 9 ^th, if you have respect to persons, &c. One way it is true, another way false. Take the words Divisim, thus, may I, or must I shew civill respect to a rich man that is much above me, though wicked, (much more if a Magistrate, Father, &c. for these relations are not founded upon Grace?) yes that you must, else you transgresse the Royall Law, Honour thy Father &c. But take the words, Conjunctim, thus, may I show civil respect to rich persons, &c. and despise a poor man that hath the Faith of our Lord Jesus? No, if you doe, you sinne.

God will allow no such respect of persons: thus the Scri­ptures are preserved in their harmony, and Natures Light not offended.

Take another instance, the glory of the Lord, &c. put out by such as the world call Quakers, p. 10, 11, 12. He takes the words of our Saviour, Mat. 5.34. Swear not at all, to overthrow all swearing; there he brings in severall holy men who sware, Abraham, Iacob, David, the Angel, Rev. 10. & Ierem: 4.2. All that he answers is, but Christ saith, Swear not at all.

I observe he doth not mention Paul in 2 Cor. 1.23. I call God for a record upon my soule; and other places where Paul swears, yet he was after Christ; did Paul, and the Angel sin? It is not my purpose to enlarge upon this; but a few words, ver. 33. Thou shalt not forswear thy selfe. 1. 1 But Christ doth not quote the Deut. 10.20. & 6.13. where it is joyned to the command of fearing God and serving him, Thou shalt sweare by his name. [Page 28]Indeed by the Earth, Heaven, or Ierusalem, &c. thou shalt not sweare, no nor by the name of God vainely, but when thou art called to it upon just and weighty causes, then the old com­mand holds, else I must destroy a part of the Law, and not fulfill it, verse 17.

2 2. In an oath there is some religious worship performed to God, declaring him to be the Omniscient God, and the Punisher of such as dare speak falshood; would Christ take away this honour from his father?

3 Thirdly, There is as much need of an Oath in regard of the end of an Oath now after Christ, as ever there was before Christ. 22 Exod. 11. [...], men doe sweare, not men did sweare before Christ, but now left it since he spake those words; there is strife still.

Object: But where there is strife they are without, p. 12.

• Ans. 1. It were well for you if you were within.
• 2. There may be difference between those who are in Christ, and yet the difference so fairly carried as no sinfull strife, but an Oath will put an end to it.
• 3. But may a Magistrate give an Oath to those who are without? surely no: if that be true, must not swear at all. How then shall strife be ended?
• 4. We know the Quakers are not so perfect, but strife will be among them.

4 Fourthly, The Quakers bid men be guided by their Consci­ences the Light of God within: but that Light within, doth lead men to swear in great cases, to put an end to strife: we finde it so among the Heathen, Abimelech &c. both before and after Christ. The Light of Nature teacheth this, why then doe you oppose it?

5 Fifthly, I wonder Paul should so forget himself, to sinne so fearfully in swearing as he did: yea, and an Angel also: Isa. 65.16. relates to the times after Christ.

Conclusion. Hence then it followes, the Quakers Light is the Light of Satan, not of Christ.

Major. The Major cannot be denied, for will the Light of Christ teach men to leave his own perfect rule, and goe to an imper­fect one? then if men walk by it, how can they be blamed? he must then approve of sinne.

The Minor need proof, which is this:

That Light which takes men off from the Law of God, his Word; and send them to the Light of Conscience to be guided by it, that Light take men off from a perfect rule, and send them to an imperfect one, &c.

But thus doe the Quakers. Ergo.

The Word of God is perfect, Psal. 19.7. 2 Tim. 3.16, 17. But the Quakers doe not send men to the Word, but to their Con­sciences. I grant it were well if men did attend to the dictates of a true illightned Conscience, and it will be fearfull damna­tion that they doe not. But this is not all the Quakers mean.

But however the Light of Conscience is (1) but Imperfect. (2) It may erre. It is imperfect: here I will take occasion to examine the Text, the Quakers make so much use of, 1. Joh. 9. This was the true light, which lighteth every one that cometh into the world. But I would faine know, why these Quakers con­found this Light, with Conscience, as if they were both one, is the Conscience and Christ all one? what folly is this.

Secondly, But what doe they mean, that Christ lighteth every one who cometh into the world, with saving light, Fruits of fast, pag 23. as Parnel his 29 Querie intimates? this is manifestly false.

1 For how great a part of the world is there who know no­thing of Christ, Redemption, Justification by Christs righteous­nesse, Originall sinne, Saving faith, &c. They never heard the sound of these things.

2 The next Verse confutes this; for the 10 ver. saith, The world knew him not: How then doth he lighten every one with such a knowledge, when the Text saith plainly the world knew him not?

What miserable blind Consciences doe we find where people have lived under the revelation of Christ! I am confident many know not the essentials to salvation.

The meaning then is:

1 If we speak of the Light of Reason, Understanding, so Christ lighteth every one who cometh into the world.

2. Or if we speak of Saving light, As many, or every one who hath that saving Light, it is Christ who illightneth him.

3. So we may say of Common Light; Christ giveth that also. As Psal. 136.8. The Lord raiseth them that are bowed down. What every one? we see the contrary; but those who are raised, it is he who lifts them up, none else can.

Againe, Conscience may and doth erre; this is a further proof of the imperfection of it, Acts 26.9. Paul was there guided by his Conscience, but it erred. Did not of old, Doe not now all Errors, and Heresies plead Conscience, Papists, So­cinians, &c? I doubt not Queen Mary would say, her Con­science led her to burn the eminent servants of Christ.

Now let us hear what the Quakers say:

Quakers glory, &c. p. 2. They exhort the Magistrates to let the Priests alone, and to receive the Law of God which is perfect according to that in the Conscience: herein have truth in all ages suffered by them who made Lawes contrary to that in the Con­science. No matter for the Word then.

Fell. pag. 5. The Priests of thy high places (Oh England!) bear witnesse before my face against thee, which thou hast set up contrary to my will which I have made manifest in every mans Conscience. No, not every mans, you are not perfect, Fell. So once before in the same page.

Wooddrove. p. 15, 16 Turne your minde within you to the pure Light of Christ in your Consciences, see by this light within you, who rule within you. No matter for the perfect rule without you, to try the light within you, nor to help it.

J. N. against Harris, p. 15. Make our Light within, to be the Light of the Covenant of Grace. How many millions of soules know nothing of it!

Bishop p. 21. Sink down to that of God in every one of your Con­sciences, the light of Christ. In all their Books the Word of God written is made of no account.

But while the Quakers thus call on all men, to turn to that within them, (their Consciences) why doe they so cry out upon the Magistrates for sending them to Bridwell and Prisons, since they doe as the Light within them bid them? They practise their doctrine, but the Magistrates have the Light without them in the perfect rule, to guide Conscience within them. What a wofull Nation should we have where Consciences are so blinde, erroneous, sleepy, benummed, and some cauterized, if men should lay by the perfect rule, and goe to that? the Prince of darknesse would make strange worke.

This Argument differs from the third.

Major. The Major is clear, for then Christ must oppose himself, if he hath left Ordinances wherein people shall attend upon God, till the end of the world, and now have a light to destroy them, Christ hath changed his minde. 1 Cor 11.26. In the Lords Sup­per we shew the Lords death till he come. Christ is not come yet: Christ bid them eat and drink in remembrance of him: his words at the Institution of the Lords Supper. What were the Apostles onely to remember him, or the Corinthians, and those first Churches? Must not all Churches till he comes so remember him? Mat. 28.19, 20. Teach and Baptize, I am with you to the end of the world. What doe you limit this teaching and bapti­zing, to the Apostles? They are dead many hundred years since, yet the end of the world is not come; how then can these words be fulfilled, but in the ordinary Officers, who succeed the A­postles, is the rule of Christ, Mat. 18.15, 16, 17, 18, &c. come to an end? I am sure there are offences still, and you perfect ones are as vile offenders as any, but you have taken a course to prevent all discipline, for your Church is within, so shut up that none can come at it, no nor believe it.

Minor. But the Quakers light destroy all the Ordinances and Insti­tutions of Christ.

Parnel: Wat: p. 8. They (who brought the profession of the Christian Faith into England first) had two Sacraments, Infants Baptisme is one, that which they call the Supper of the Lord is an­other; and they had the carnall bread and wine as the Priests and people hath now. See what esteem this youth hath of the Ordi­nances, against the Baptists he talketh much for their baptizing with water, but I will not transcribe his babling.

Naylor against I. Reyner, pag. 3. Church, Prayers, Baptisme, Singing, we witnesse to be all within. None of these outward.

Naylor, Saluta: p. 7. Is not Christ the Ordinance (no that he is not) and the end of all Ordinances? I here is truth in this and it overthrows the former, for if he be the end of the Ordinance, how can he be the Ordinance it self? are the means, the end? a few lines after. Is not he the Sabbath, Baptisme, Supper? No that he is not.

In p 33. there we have the bottome: he will not deny but these Visibles (as he calls them) had their place and time, but what are they now? He meets with an Objection of ours, which is this, They are commands of God, and there is no Scripture for taking them away. This is an Objection indeed: to which he answers, I say those carnall things are but commands, as Circumcison, and the Passeover were, and many other, yet were they taken away without letter, by that spirit that gave them, when they were abused: what letter had Hezekiah to take away the brazen Serpent? what scripture had Paul to cry down Circum­cision &c. — so runs on. But why doth not Naylor make up his answer fully, applying what he faith to the Objection, thus, So we the Quakers having the infallible spirit which gave these com­mands, d [...]e by the same, seeing you abuse them, without scripture take them away. Now your answer is complete. But

First, I say, those carnall things (as you call them) are so spi­rituall, that all the perfection the Quakers brag of, will not be sufficient to perform one of them in the holy manner the letter (as you call the Word) requires.

Secondly, You talke of the Infallible spirit, but you have not given us the signes of it as Paul did, 2 Cor. 12.12. nay the Sa­tanicall [Page 33]spirit by which you are acted, hath not given you so much wit, to ca [...]ry your selves cunningly, but you doe so mani­festly crosse Christ and the Apostles, that people must throw away their Bibles, and naturall Light before they can believe you.

Thirdly, You mistake in the brazen Serpent, for it was not ordained as a means of worship in the Church, but onely for the time while Serpents stung them in the Wildernesse, they were to look to it, typifying Christ; but when they were past Serpents in Canaan there was no use of it: yet Hezekiah wan­ted no meanes whereby he might certainly know the minde of God.

Fourthly, The worship then instituted was not taken away, because abused; but because the Ceremoniall part was ful­filled.

Fiftly, Jesus Christ the Lord of the Church may institute what means of worship he pleaseth, his Apostles did converse with him fourty dayes after his resurrection, Acts 1.3 speak­ing of the things pertaining to the kingdome of God: They had order what to doe; but I hardly think the Quakers were there then with him, and heard that doctrine, they teach us.

Sixtly, Then the Spirit of God teach us to deny God that which he hath had since the world began, viz: Externall wor­ship: for prayer, sacrifices, and the teaching of the family by the Father of the family, these parts of worship we finde at the be­ginning: after that, more. But now God must have none at all; how shall we know there is a God in the world if we take away his worship?

Seventhly, Christ must then be a great destroyer of the Law, and not a fulfiller, Mat. 5.17. for he must quite blot out the second Commandment; as the fourth, and fifth, by these Qua­kers.

Eighthly, The right performing of the worship of God, will cost pains, and exercise of graces; but the spirit in the Quakers have taken them off from that burden.

Conclusion. Since then the Quakers Light destroy the Ordinances of Christ, hence I conclude, their Light is the light of Satan, not of Christ.

The Major, is so clear, that it needs no proof; for to deny a a saving work, a great part of his redemption, this cannot come from Christ.

Minor. But the Quakers light denyeth a great worke of Christ in the hearts of them, who believe: I mean such a work as must necessarily be in all such: that is, a worke of inherent holinesse, the new creature distinct from Christ's person, and from his imputed righteousnesse to our Justification: The Quakers in these Books I have, have spoken confusedly, and covertly, yet this must be their doctrine, or some other notion, being Christ­ed with Christ, Godded with God; which I verily think they ayme at.

Naylor, Saluta: p. 20. hath these words, But say you, this is that righteousnesse we believe in, and by which we are justified, by that blood which was shed at Jerusalem, and by that obedience that was in him, and by that holinesse: but that the want of his righ­teousnesse in us, or that want of Christ, or his blood in us can hin­der our Justification, that we deny, and look upon it as heresie, it is Christ without us that hath satisfied for sinne, his righteous­nesse, faith, patience, love, obedience, &c. its these without us that whoever believes in shall be saved, and by this faith the un­godly is justified.

Pag. 23. We can doe nothing, neither doe we desire to doe any thing, yet can we doe all things that he wills, through him that is in us.

Pag. 2. While you live, sinne lives; and if we say we have no sinne we deceive our selves (this is well) but where he alone lives, there is no sinne, &c.

I deny not, but we are justified, by the righteousnesse, satis­faction of Christ without us, as opposed to Inherency in us. But I utterly deny that God ever imputes that righteousnesse to us, but withall he works inherent righteousnesse in us, so as no man [Page 35]can be in a state of Justification, or shall ever see God, who hath not this inherent work of holinesse in him, Heb. 12.14.

I deny also, that a person whom the Lord actually justifieth is an ungodly person; in that instant its true, he is ungodly, if you compare him with the Covenant of works, he is a transgressor of it, which is the scope of the Apostle, in the Rom. 3.4. Rom. 3.4. To cut all men off from seeking life in that Covenant, and to bring them to the righteousnesse of Christ: but look on him in refe­rence to the Covenant of grace, he is now a believer; or else he cannot be justified, and such a believer as hath received Christ to Union, and now trusts to Christ for Communion of benefits, whereof justification is one. He that prates of his justi­fication before this Faith, he doth but prate of that which he shall never finde. That absurd notion of faith justifying onely Declarative, I would have opposed, had this place been conve­nient.

I affirme also, that the work of inherent holinesse which maketh us new Creatures, is a distinct thing from Christ his person; though among our New-England notions, this was received when the errours raged there, that Christ was the new Creature; but for the 2 Cor. 5.17. they made miserable Grammar of the verse, undertaking to be the Interpreters of the Originall, read it thus, if any man be in Christ the new Creature, and thus indeed Christ being perfect, no wonder though the Quakers are perfect; for there is nothing in them but Christ. And thus we see the meaning of that which we have so wondered at, that men and women, who could not tell how to live honestly among men, keep promises, keep from pilfe­ring. deale justly (no nor can scarce doe it at this day) since these Quakers came are on a sudden mounted aloft, and tell o­thers they are perfect. No wonder, for if Christ be the new Creature, the new Creature then cannot grow, for Christ can­not be more perfect then he is, I affirme also that those who desine to doe nothing, as saith Naylor, they are not in Christ, (if we speak of adulti) Rom. 7.21. and their wills are renewed.

I know not what to make of that phrase, While you live, sin live, to take it in our sense, they cry out upon us.

Mason p. 11. reproves Mr. Scortrith with scorne, because [Page 36]he affirmed that God and a Saint are not one, Christ and a Saint are not one, then quotes against him, Joh. 17.11. (which is no­thing to his purpose) 21.22. and 2 Cor. 6.16. 1 Cor 6.17. yet (saith he) is there not a reall union between them, is not Christ the head of the body, &c? I believe Mr. Scortrith did never deny this, for it is the common received truth among Divines, that the union is reall, that is, it is not Ens rationis, 'tis not an imagi­nary thing, and that Christ is the head Mysticè, who denyes it? Dr. Saints per­sev: p. 189. Owen hath gone as farre as a man can goe with safety (I think) in this point; and yet not spoken more then some others have before him, both Bucanus, and Polanus: so that it was another kinde of union which Mr. Scortrith denyed, and with him also, all sober men.

Parnel. fruits fast. p. 25. propounds these two queries to Priest Stalham, Sparrow, and among the rest 48. What is your owne righteousnesse, and what is the righteousnesse of Christ, and how doe you distinguish between them? What a hard question is this to answer, in a sound way also? but then 49. Whether he that is justified by the righteousnesse of Christ, doth not dwell in it, and it in him, and whether he that dwells in the righteousnesse of Christ doth sin, yea or nay? Is this the way whereby you come to be so free from sin? You say below, these things (i. e. the 61 Queries) I doe not aske as if I knew them not, but for the satis­faction of the simple, &c. The simple are beholden to you, but had not you been both proud and simple you would not have moved such queries as you have done. But I answer: for the righteousnesse of Christ dwelling, &c. I deny that the righteous­nesse of Christ whereby a believer is justified doth dwell in him: Saluta: &c. p. 20. your fellow Quaker Naylor is against you: (unlesse you carry this secretly, that we are Christed with Christ, then something you may gather) by dwelling, I mean it is not in­herent in us. Bellarmine makes difference between the satisfa­ction of Christ, by which we are pardoned, (this he will not ad­mit to be in us) and that righteousnesse by which we are justifi­ed; this he saith is inherent in us. But I dare not accuse the Quakers of being guilty of so much knowledge, and I presume you doe not aime at his doctrine.

For the other phrase, The justified person dwelling in the righ­teousnesse [Page 37]of Christ, and so not sinning; I confesse my simplicity cannot understand this, unlesse it had more sense in it. I have read 2 Pet. 3.13. wherein dwelleth righteousnesse, but I have not read, where a Beleever dwels in Christs righteousnesse, nor of so dwelling as not to sin.

The Major need no proof, Christ doth not teach men to o­mit their duty, then he is a teacher of unrighteousnesse.

Minor. But the Quakers light teach men to omit their duty to God, viz. Prayer.

Parnel Watch, p 46. speaking against one, Then thou went on with thy deluding spirit, pressing the wicked to pray, whereas Prov. 15.8. the prayers of the wicked are abominable; and thus thou didst that which was ab [...]minable in the sight of God, in pray­ing thy selfe, and teaching the wicked to pray.

Parnel Gol: p. 15. The Apostles did not teach the wicked to pray.

Answ. 1. It is true, while men goe on in a course of wick­ednesse, and are resolved to doe so, yet in the meane time think to heale themselves, and make God amends by their Prayers, the Lord saith, he abominates their Prayers: Yet this denyeth not Prayer to be their duty, to acknowledge their Lord and Creator, upon whom they depend.

2. Why doe the Quakers so much call all people to sinke downe to the light of God in the Conscience [as before] yet now exclaime upon men for being guided by it? the light of God in the Conscience doth teach men to pray, bids them pray: should they not obey their Conscience? 1 Jonah 6.14. the Con­science of the Heathens did dictate Prayer.

3. Must not the wicked pray because they sin, and so it is a­bominable? then they must not plow neither, for that also is sinne. Prov. 21.4. but all sin is abominable to God: what then, must not the wicked plow? I hope then the Quakers will keep their families.

4. Was Peter no Apostle, was not Simon Magus wicked? read Acts 8.22. The Apostle lames, 5 Chap. 13. Is any among you afflicted? Let him pray. But suppose a wicked man (though I love Charity well, yet I believe there might be one or two a­mong those Tribes he writes to) what must he doe? Surely, Any will reach him. If he may pray when afflicted, why not at at other times: observe the Epistle, and you will finde there were some wicked among them.

5. What mean those words, Ier. 10.25. Fury on families that call not on his name.

Naylor Saluta. p. 19. to the question, must we not pray? Answers, I say waite for the spirit of prayer. But where learn you this? This is your spirits Divinity, suppose the Spirit comes not this month or yeare? Then it seems the duty must lye by: for God to give his Spirit is his free act, for me to pray is my duty, as a Creature; let me doe my duty, and waite there for the free Spirit of God.

p. 20 Your times are in your owne hands: (a little after) but the times of Sons and Daughters are not in their hands, no, it's true, if you mean those times David speaks of, Psal. 31.15. But the times of prayer you speak of. Daniel was a Son, yet he Chap. 6.10. three times a day prayed. so David, and others had their times. But for times to sin we abhorre them, we hope, more then you.

Conclusion. Since then the Quakers Light teach people to omit prayer, I conclude, their light is of Satan, &c.

Major. Christ his Light teach us that for the Dominion of sin, all his people are freed from it, Rom. 7.12.14 but he that saith he hath not the being of sin, and doth not sin, the truth is not in him, 1 Ioh. 1.8.

Iob had more holinesse in him then all the Quakers, God saith of him that he was perfect, ch. 1. i. e. Evangelically, not Legally, for Chap. 9.20. he speak other language, so 30. & 31. verses.

Iob 14.4. 1 Kings 8.46. Eccles. 7.20. Prov. 20.9. Iam. 3.2. a relative perfection in our justification, an inherent perfection of parts, in our Sanctification, a striving after perfection in degrees; such perfection we own, i. e. uprightnesse; but for the Quakers perfection let them keep it: Paul found a body of death, Rom. 7. and saith he was not perfect, Phil. 3.12. Where sinne hath no dominion, that man is perfect, i.e. Evangelically, Psal. 19.13. the word is [...] I shall be perfect, or complete, upright. yet such an one may have sinnes, ver. 12. so not perfect legally. Who knowes his errours? not David, but the Qua­kers.

This their books are so full of that it were tedious to tran­scribe. Mason spends the seven first pages of his book about this, quoting some texts for it where perfection is mentioned, (which we owne in a sound sense) then railing upon the Priests, and damning them to hell because they crosse them.

Mason. p. 3. makes great use of Ephes. 4.12. &c. perfecting of the Saints, &c. thus he argues, if the Saints could not be per­fect in this life, were not these Apostles and Pastors, put upon a needlesse imployment? Can the Priests of the nation prove that Saints are tossed in heaven? Were Englands blinde watch-men commissionated from Christ, they would not prate thus against per­fection.

But if Mason had well understood the Originall word [...] here rendered perfecting, he might have known that the word is translated by others, For the gathering together of Saints, by others, the Coagmentation, joyning, gluing together of Saints, to Christ by faith, to the body by love: not noting the per­fection of the growth, but such a perfection, as when a body hath all its members. He addes presently for the Edifying of the body of Christ. What need of Edifying when there is compleat per­fection, so that till this Mysticall body have all its Members, the Ministery must last. When a body hath all its Members, none wanting, broken, or out of joynt, yet then those Members must grow.

If he will fetch his strength from the 13. v. a perfect man, &c. [Page 40]and that perfect man, to be meant of every singular believer, to what I have said before about perfection, I adde, we acknow­ledge there are thousands (through mercy) of perfect men, in England, as perfect is opposed to children tossed to and fro in ver. 14. saints who stand so unmovable, and firme, that all the windes of Quakers and other Hereticks doctrines cannot shake them here upon earth.

But by the former words, Till we all come or meet &c. he seems to speak of the whole mysticall body, which shall be a perfect man, when they meet All in the unity &c. and of the knowledge of the Son of God: But I doe not believe any man hath that perfect knowledge of him, in this life, which they shall have.

There are abundance of these true members, who dye before they are perfect in inherent holinesse I am sure, or else you must cut off most of the members (nay all) which your friend Caste­lio in this point dare not doe, but hath so much charity to say, that such shall be saved: but there are no Pastours in heaven to perfect them: then the Pastours worke is not needlesse, though the members come not to the perfect growth in this life. Nay the need of Pastours argue imperfection; for when perfection is come, there will be no need of these: what need of Nurses, Tutors, School-masters, &c. when perfection is at­tained? More may be said, but I forbear.

Another Text the Quakers use is Phil 3.15. But what say they to the 12 ver. Paul saith he was not perfect. Here ap­pears a contradiction: But, Perfect men may be considered two waies:

1. Either with reference to the perfect rule; so no man is in­herently, and legally perfect.

Or 2. Comparatively, with other men; thus some are but young scholars, they understand not the fulnesse of the righte­ousnesse of Christ, &c. but are troubled about Circumcision, v. 3. and other Jewish matters; others are more growne in the knowledge of Christ, and his grace, more solid in judgement, who are perfect in comparison of others, and this perfection he means, as the next verse, and the observation of the Chapter proves; thus some little children, young men, Fathers, 1 Joh. 2.13.

Some think he calls the false Teachers, the perfect men, [...] & [...]. Zanch: in loc. speak­ing ironically, and nipping them for their boasting.

Musculus upon this Text tells us of a debate he had with a Franciscan, who with great impudencie boasted he was perfect: but saith of him, he did so rage, that he seemed perfect in fury and madnesse: the same is evident in these Quakers, when crossed; for fierce countenances, fury, raging, railing, I have not read nor seen the like, of such as talke of perfection. By what I have said, you may answer all they alledge for perfection.

Thus also Priests ignorance, p. 4. Parnel. fr: fast: p. 24. But stay Parnel, are you perfect too? have you no sinne? doe you so dwell in the righteousnesse of Christ? I omit thy abominable pride which thou manifestest in thy Books; with other sinnes easily to be proved. I onely turn thee to 1 Pet. 2.23. When Christ was reviled he reviled not againe. Doe you show this Spi­rit of Christ? Let any reade your Reply (as you call it) to Dr. Draton, where you have cut off Goliahs head, then judge: as you have printed your adversary, yet any one shall see what he speaks is with reason, scripture, and sobriety; but what is your return to a man of his quality and yeers? Impudent lyar, blinde sot, blasphemer, lyar, hypocrite, deceiver, the book is stuffed with this language.

Come to the Civil power, and see how your infallible spirit carry you there. Fru: fast. p. 10. in your reply to your Mitti­mus (as you call it) thus you speak to the four Justices, naming them. In the Mittimus you finde severall lyes, slanders, &c. I shall reply to the same, and return the venome upon your venomous spirits, &c. This is the perfect man, without sinne; such also is Naylor and Mason. I will give you leave to brag of your per­fection: but reade Jude 8.9. 2 Pet. 2.10. Concluson. I doe conclude both from your doctrine and your practice that your light is from Satan.

For the Major none will question that, 1 Tim. 5.17. There is double honour allowed the labourers in word and doctrine: For the Churches, they bear such an honourable relation to Christ, that sure Christ will not thus teach people to revile them, 2 Cor. 11.2.

This they avoid, by denying with greatest abhorrency that any of the Ministers are such, or the Churches.

Priests igno: p. 2. Wood [...]d p. 16. but especially Parnel twice in his Fr [...]fast, tells us of the Church in God, 1 Thess. 1.1. and Parnel saith he ownes that Church, and amongst his Queries to the Priests, he would have them tell him what Church that is.

I wish Parnel had set down the interpretation from his in­fallible spirit, I believe we should have found a blasphemous one. But let us examine the Text, this Church of the Thessalon. which was in God, ch. 5. ver. 12, 13. had Rulers over them, and they were to esteem them highly, &c. But Parnel, you deny all Church Officers, so doe all your sect; then you are not in God, as this Church was.

In the 14 ver: they were to warn the unruly: in the 2 Epist: 3. ch: 11. there were disorderly walkers, how can unruly, and disorderly persons be in God? tell us this. This Church was taught to pray without ceasing, but you bid stay till the spirit moves.

But note this by the way, a Church may be said to be a Church in God, and yet there may be some unruly, and disor­derly persons amongst them. If you say, but they must be ex­horted, warned &c. that is true, and so doe we exhort, warn, &c. this will help save our Churches, (some at least I am sure.)

But what is it to be in God still? should I say (as some, hyperbolically, but very harshly and unsavourily) After a sort Deified? this I believe would please the Quakers, but how are unruly and disorderly persons Deified? shall I say, Church in God? so this Church (and others) is differenced from the As­semblies of Pagans, as they were before, not in God, but Idols. [Page 43]And in Christ, so differenced from the Iewes, who refused Christ. They professed the Faith of God and Christ, or they had an inward fellowship (some of them) and union with God and Christ, as I Ioh. 1.3. Our fellowship is with the Father and his Son, &c. Others had an outward fellowship, as owned the faith, partaked of his Ordinances, and so visibly did professe themselves to be the body of Christ.

But let M. Mason observe, the Apostle makes a distinction here between God the Father and Christ; but he p. 8. saith, to make God, Christ, and Holy Ghost, three distinct persons, Afterwards p. 9. he calls it a bold and a blasphemous assertion. is such a piece of Divinity, as was never known till the Merchants of Babylon broached it: then quotes 14 Ioh. v. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. But what will M. Mason gather from hence, that Christ as he is the eternall Son of God, is of the same Essence with the Father, so that the Essence is but One? this we yeild. But I pray what doe you make of the Humanity of Christ? was it reall or imagi­nary? if reall, what, is the Humanity of Christ the same Essence with the Godhead? this is new Divinity indeed; what, is there no difference between Christ, and the Divine Essence subsisting in the relation of the Son (if the word Person be so offensive?) you say, for the simples sake, p. 9. you will set down what the Lord gives you in vindication of his honour.

Then quote the 14 of Ioh. the simple ones are much obliged to you and Parnel, but you have shown your selfe but simple in this, and have notably vindicated the honour of God, to make Christ, who is God-Man, and without the Manhood is not Christ, that the Manhood also must be one Essence with the Godhead.

But to return to Parnel, I have already given one ground from the Church of the Thessalon to prove there are some true Churches in England. I scarce thinke Parnel know what a Church is, for if he define it right, he must overthrow divers of his own principles. I wish his infallible spirit would have let us known his minde, that we might have tried the Quakers Church: but I will leave this with all the Quakers, Seekers, Separatists in England, that if they will own the Church of Corinth to be a true Church, then I will prove there are now many Churches in England that are true also.

For the Ministers whom you and others call Priests, and say, we run before we were sent, (you doe well to begin first to cast that upon us, which you know will fall upon your owne heads:) no, we can prove our sending: Bishop. p. 23. he brings against us the 1. Tit. 7. Well, and are there not many Ministers who doe in a good measure walk up to those rules though they dare not brag of your perfection? Covetousnesse is the great thing you object; but to this I have answered before. As for anger, we may be angry; and if an excesse in anger sometimes, will cut us off from being true Ministers, then Paul and Barna­bas were not true Apostles. Reade Acts 15.39. if infirmities cut us off, then Peter was no Apostle who the second time halted, Gal. 2. Then Ieremiah, Ionah, were no true Prophets. But G. Dicitur [...] pre­priè qui ad­haeret alicui, velut ungui­bus affixus, nec sese finit avelli. Bul­ling. in loc. Bishop: why doe you leave out the 9 ver: where a Bishop must hold fast the faithfull Word: here is no mention of the infallible spirit which he must forsake this faithfull Word, to listen after: Then he must be able by sound doctrine (not Quakers dreams) to exhort, and convince gainsayers. Where are these quaking Prat­lers, and others also, if these rules must trie them, who doe not know how to speak sense, but their reason is railing, and their answers, you lye, &c.

Also G. Bish: why did you not quote the 5 ver. where Titus a Church-Officer was left to Ordain other Church-Officers: these persons so qualified. Lay these together, and here is the true sending of a Minister (the peoples choice supposed, which we we also have.)

Thou doest quote also 1 Tim. 3.3. Take in the 2 v. also, there is one apt to teach: take in the 6 ver. And though Parnel be farre enough from the abilities required in a Bishop, many miles short, yet as he is a Novice lifted up with pride, so let him take heed of the next words. And why did not thou quote the 4 chap. of this Epist: 14 ver: & 5 chap: 22. Lay hands sud­denly. &c. and there you should have seen how these qualified men came into their places.

Trie us then for abilities, if you can, all you Quakers and Separatifts in England; then see what is required by the A­posties example to bring us into the Ministery, and prove we have it not.

Object. You are Ordained by Bishops.

Answ. To this I have answered at large in another Book, though it be false of abundance of us, we receiv'd no Ordination from the Bishops; yet I wish that the Separatists would think of one thing, in Rev. 6.9, 10, 11. there is mention made of many slain for the Word of God, &c. these had white robes given them, &c these who were slain must needs fall under the X Persecu­tions under the heathen Emperours, and may well in a speciall manner look to that horrible butchery under Dioclesian, but if you know those times, you will finde there were abundance of Bishops slain in those times (I mean Bishops who were above Presbyters in the Church) and you shall finde abundance of ceremonies, humane inventions in those times in the worship of God, yet we finde God doth not show such disdain of them as you doe now, he gives them white robes. Thus Bp: Cranmer, Ridley, Hooper, and abundance of Ministers ordained by those Bishops, but suffered gloriously for the testimony which they held, the Lord will own them with honour in the Day of Judgment; how then you come to cast off so many Ministers of Christ, so able in the worke of the Gospel, (as none have been more able since the Apostles dayes, no nor so able) so godly in their con­versation, to whose Ministery God hath sealed, in the spirituall children he hath given them, and onely because they were or­dained by Bishops, (who yet were Ministers and did Ministeriall work) doe you provide to answer for this at that day.

Some men will scarce own any mans Ordination but that which is by such Bishops, and you will own no Ministers who are ordained by such; if you two should meet, who would be the strongest?

Parnel Gol: p. 26. makes this a proof against our Ministery, that it is earthly, because in thus many years we have wrought no better reformation.

1. But Parnel, the English Ministery (through grace) will show the greatest reformation in the world, and yet none in the world opposed like it. We can show the souls who confesse by us the Lord inlightened them, turned them, and hath built them up.

2. Then Isaiahs, and Ieremiahs, with other of the Prophets [Page 46]Ministery was earthly, for I am sure they wrought but little re­formation.

3. What, was Christs Ministery earthly also? he complains Isa. 49.4. that he had laboured in vain.

4. What? you will have many called, and many chosen? Christ saith the contrary.

Conclusion. To conclude, I dare affirm that there is as true and as able a Ministery in England this day, as ever was since the Apostles died: and if any Quakers or Separatists will undertake to prove the contrary, so they will argue and not babble, they shall soon finde those who will answer them. While therefore you cast filth upon these (I plead not for every particular Minister) and upon all the Churches, you show your light to be of Satan, &c.

Major. The Spirit of Christ is a Spirit of wisdome, but he that speaketh irrationally, nonsense, he doth not speak wisely: the Spirit of God is a most rationall Spirit, and where it speaks, it speaks like it self, Acts 6.10. They were not able to resist the wisdome and the Spirit by which Stephen spake. Thus Paul, Apol­los, &c. they spake rationally, carried such strength, that none could answer them.

Ministers must be men able to convince, 1 Tit. 9. [...]. those that talk irrationally will never [...].

I know Satan can speak rationally, & sense also, which makes us wonder what he means to take such instruments, unlesse it be because he is at the last, seeing witty Jesuits cannot doe the busi­nesse, now try if foolish Quakers can doe it: this also I know, that reason being a beam of God, there can be no true reason for sin or errour. Also, though abundance of Gods people are weak and shallow, yet they never speak truth, but they speak sense, and reason.

But here we have a pack, mightily insulting over the Mini­sters [Page 47]because they doe not assume to themselves the infallible Spirit, in that notion which the Quakers boast they have it, and yet cannot speak rationally. Let us hear a little.

Qua: gl [...]: of God, p 3, 4. there they undertake to answer the arguments the Apostle brings, 1 Cor. 9.9, 10, 11, &c. to prove the maintenance of Ministers: They that preach on the Gospel must live upon the Gospel. This scripture shames you, and shews your Gospel will not maintain you, but you seek to Magistrat s [...] and the Ministers of the Gospel are ashamed of such a pack of teachers. This is his answer, so, He that thresheth, thresheth in hope: Oh how have they threshed in hope all this while, and got forth no corne, but are faine to seeke to the Magistrates for me [...]nes and food. So, Thou shalt not muzzle the month of the Oxe: Oh you shamelesse teachers, your mouthes must be muzled, have been treading all this while, and no corne trodden out to feed you, but are faine to seek to the Magistrates. Doe not these men speak gal­lantly? Is not here evidence of the infallible Spirit? But if these Quakers would have spoken like men, thus ye should have said: True, those who preach the Gospel, those who thresh, those who tread out, &c. that is, those who doe perform the work of the Lords Ministers, in teaching, Iabouring faithfully, they may challenge maintenance by these Scriptures. But you doe not thresh, labour, &c. in the Lords work. Therefore you cannot claim maintenance from these Seriptures; now you had spoken rationally, and there had been matter of shame indeed that we should have called for corn, and not wrought: but now you have cast all the shame upon the people, that we preaching, labouring, threshing, &c. are denied our corn, our maintenance, and are forced to goe to the Magistrates our nursing fathers, Isa. 49 v. 23. for it. Like a man who hath been plowing and threshing halfe a yeare for another, when he comes to demand his wages, he is denied: the man goeth to the Magistrate to be helped, the Quakers cry out, Oh thou shamelesse man, hast thou been plowing and threshing so long, and now art fain to goe to the Magistrate? &c. Doth the man deserve shame, or he who deny him his due? So here.

Thus, Priests Igno: p. 2. The teachers of the world sprinkle Infants, telling people its an Ordinance of God, which is contrary [Page 48]to the Scriptures; and quotes in his margent Gal. 3.1. Luc. 1.26.36. Let any one reade those Scriptures, and see how they oppose it: he quotes no other Scriptures.

In the next: The teachers of the world call people unto a Sacra­ment, for the which there is no Scripture, here they act contrary to the Scriptures: quoting Gen. 29.28. the words are these, and Iacob did so and fulfilled her weeke, and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also, and Gen. 10. but no verse. These are all the Scriptures. Here you see the Priests ignorance, and the Qua­kers knowledge laid together.

So let any one that hath reason reade Naylor his Answer to Io: Reyners Queries. Parnel against Dr. Draton, and then see if it be not a wofull judgment of God to let a Nation be over­run, and people catched, with such witlesse, brainlesse fellowes, besides their grosse, abominable principles, that destroy Scri­ptures, Ordinances, Churches, civil States, &c.

Conclusion. Since then the Light which the Quakers boast come from the infallible Spirit in them, is thus, irrationall, brutish, &c. I con­clude, their Light is from Satan, not from Christ.

The Major is plain, 3 Ioh. 36.18.16. & 16 Mar. 16. If faith and holinesse shall go to hell, what shall goe to heaven?

Minor. They doe not say this in so many words, but by conse­quence; for the persons who are such, and they cannot disprove it, they affirm to be in that con­dition. But the Quakers Light affirmeth sound believers, and persons who walk in obedience &c. to be in a state of con­demnation.

For we are assured there are hundreds of sound believers in Christ in England, that fear to sinne, walke with the Lord, (and that more close than the Quakers) who doe detest and abomi­nate the Quakers doctrines, principles, and practises; but the Quakers say of those who come not amongst them, that they shall be damned, perish, &c. This is their common language a­bout us.

Thus J. Toldervy, Ep. 17.18. told his Master Col. Web. Thus Mason p. 8. speaking to the Ministers, whom he calls Merchants of Babylon, bid us read our doom, in Revel. 18.7.8. yet among these I am sure are very sound believers, and very holy men, if they may be tried by the word: which shall try them, yea and you Mason, and all your Quakers, notwithstanding your boastings of the infallible Spirit.

Thus I. N. p. 17. F. Harris makes this Querie, Whether it be safe for Christians to forsake and let goe those Gospel-dispensations of the Spirit of Truth, in which God hath bles­sedly appeared, &c?

The summe of his answer is this, that all those who deny the light of Christ, and the infallible spirit (in their sense this must be taken, else we do say, some truth is in this) have nothing but the spirit of delusions: but then adds, without the infallible spirit there is no promise nor word, but what is stolen from others, or out of a booke, and had thou had no booke thou had no voice nor promise. Here is brave stuffe: the promises then in the Bible, are little worth; if I. N. can finde any promises out of this book, let him take them for me.

Thus Parnel and Naylor call the Ministers, Magicians.

Let the Quakers tell us what is faith, according as the Lord Christ declares it in his Word, (not their infallible Spirit with­out the Word) tell us what it is to walk holily, as the holy men in Scripture have done, and see if there be not many hundreds that answer that faith and holinesse.

And let me desire the Quakers but to tell me of one man in the Word of God that was holy, who embraced the Quakers doctrines, principles, and practises?

Conclusion. Since then the Quakers light condemne such, as the light of Christ approves of; hence I conclude, their light is from Sa­tan, &c.

Jam. 3.1. Be not many Masters, knowing we shall receive the greater condemnation. Who so masterly as the Quakers, Mat. 7. ver: 1.

Argum: 13 As for their shaking in that strange manner, which some re­port of them, and their books defend, it is manifest enough to [Page 50]every one, whom the God of this world hath not blinded, whence it comes, and prove their doctrine to have the same Authour: it is a thing so known amongst them, that J. Toldervy saith p. 28. He had long waited for it, then had it to purpose: My whole man was so shaken, torn, and rent, that had I not by a great strength been enabled, I could not have continued: also it did worke in me as though I had taken a strong purge, pag. 29. yet I. N. against F. Harris p. 18. abuseth the holy examples of Daniel, Moses, and David, to defend these Diabolical actings; nothing like those holy men, neither in the causes, nor effects. Let the Rea­der observe the History at the end of the book.

I shall conclude all with transcribing a few lines out of him where he relateth what one of these Quakers, who was of his former acquaintance, pag. 7. spake to him, (with Answer to one of Parnels Queries) He gave me to understand that they were sent forth to preach the Gospel by the same Christ the Apostles were, and that the person, that Son of God which died at Jerusalem, was not the Redeemer of man from sinne. Oh fearful! but the redeemer was in every particular man, that light by which he was given to see sinne, and enabled by it, if obeyed, to be redeemed from sinne: which Christ had redeemed them perfect, and now lived in them Lord of all things, by which they were made the sons of God, and so what was manifested to them by that substance, from that sub­stance were they moved to speake, which was the same holy Ghost, by which the Apostles were endued, sent forth and enabled to preach: so he declared how sometimes in the night they were imme­diately commanded by the eternall spirit to goe forth and preach, &c. Here is enough said to make us all quake: I intend not to open the wretchednesse that lieth in these words, onely this is worth the observation; that whereas some have cast off all Officers, and Churches, because we are out of order, say they, and therefore they wait for Apostolical men to be sent from God (I know not how) to bring us into order: here you have them, I hope your expectation is answered, by a fearful judge­ment of God.

But let us hear what is Parnels opinion, though propounded by way of querie, Whether any now ought to preach in the name of Jesus, but who are called to it, and fitted for it the same way as the holy men of God were, spoken of in Scripture?

What holy men he meaneth, the next Querie to this will in­terpret: Whether doe you owne immediate revelation now, yea or nay? q 8.9. The question would be, what he means by imme­diate revelation? but by comparing their spirits we may know his meaning. Bishop p. 24. proving that we are not the Ministers of Christ, brings in this for one proof, Gal. 1.12. the Ministers of Christ, received not the Gospel by man, nor the will of man, nor were they taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ in them. We may see what Parnel aimes at: but in this sense? no, we own no such revelations.

1. For, what should such Revelations concern? Faith, or Manners? If Faith; All that we are bound to believe Christ hath perfectly revealed in his Word: If Manners; Christ also hath perfectly reveal'd the whole will of God for our obedience, 2 Tim. 3.16, 17. The Scripture, &c. There it is to be found in the Scripture, whatever is requisite to make the man of God per­fect. Since we have a perfect rule, what need we more? What if there be a revelation that crosse an Article of faith, or rule of obedience in the Scripture, (as doe the pretended revelations of the Quakers) what shall we judge of it? Surely the Devil is the Author of it.

2. The foundation upon which the true Church of Christ is built, hath long since been perfectly layed; Ephes. 2.20. and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief Corner-stone. No Church need any better foundation to be built upon than the Church of the E­phesians was built upon: that was built upon, not any of our new, mad, Diabolical Apostles; but the Apostles which the Lord Jesus himself called, fitted in a glorious manner, that the servants did shew who was their Master: and Paul one of these Acts 20.27. tells the Elders, I have not shunned to declare to you All the Counsell of God, which concerneth our salvation. If the Quakers bring any more, then Paul did not declare All: but whether Paul or the Quakers speak truest, we will not dispute: shew us now such men as those Apostles were.

3. I pray tell us, what Scripture have you to prove that any men now in these dayes should have such revelations, and that now we must look again for Apostles? It may be you will make [Page 52]a tush at Scripture, and tell us your infallible Spirit tells you so: but we can upon better grounds make a tush at your Spirit, and curse you by the authority of the Spirit, for adding to his Word, Deut. 12.32. Rev. 22.18.

4. Before you brag of your Apostleship and Revelations, shew your selves to be, I will not say Christians, but Men, ra­tional men, which as yet you have not done.

5. As after those Prophets under the Old Testament whom God raised up, no man dared to assume to himselfe that Name and Office (I know there were those who were called Prophets in the N. Test. but they differed from the Old) or dared to be a Pen-man: so after the Apostles whom Christ himselfe chose, fitted, and authorized to be his Pen-men in the New Testament, let none dare to be so devilish to assume that Office, or Name unto themselves.

6. The Testatour is dead, who then shall make any other Testament? or what need is there of any other, than what him­self hath made?

For the infallible Spirit the Quakers so much prate of, abu­sing the Ministers because they doe not boast of it, (and Mason in particular, pag: 15. abuseth Mr. Scortrith, and bid his people take heed of him) I shall speak a few words. Mason adds this, Take this along with you too,

• The Spirit of Truth is the infallible Spirit.
• But George Scortrith confesses he hath not the Infallible:
• Therefore George Scortrith preaches from the Spirit of Er­rour.

What now? what doe Quakers make Syllogismes? then we look to our selves; but Mason the next time you make a Syl­logisme, desire your Master to learn you so much skill to make a true one, for the Priests doe laugh to reade such a false one. You might have indeed disposed the predicate of your question in the Major proposition, with some words altered, but now it is no where disposed. But to the businesse:

1. If the Quakers would have us affirme that all Ministers must have the Spirit in that manner as the Prophets, 1 Pet. 1. v. 11. and Apostles, v. 12. So 2 Pet. 1. ult. then we professedly say, we have it not. If the Quakers say they have it so, then I [Page 53]say, the Spirit in the Prophets and Apostles was not the infallible Spirit, for the Quakers spirit is crosse to that.

2. I affirm that Ministers (I mean not every particular man who calls himself a Minister) have that Spirit which is Infallible, to some a Spirit of gifts and grace, to some onely gifts. We pray to the Lord for it, and that we may be guided by it.

3. True Ministers doe by that Spirit from his word, teach to their people the infallible truths of Christ, they build them upon such foundations for doctrine and practise, that not one who follow their preaching shall ever miscarry, but shall ho­nour God here, and be infallibly saved hereafter.

4. Those who have forsaken this Ministerie, the Spirit of God hath left them, and let them fall into corrupt errors, and some damnable heresies, with practises grievous, and offensive to the Spirit.

But yet to say that this Spirit which (with reverent humility) we dare say we have, doth, or is bound to teach us every one in every Iota of truth, so that not in any particular whatever we may mistake, this we doe not affirm, no more than he doth, or is bound to expell every relique of corruption out of our hearts: we know but in part. Peter might boast of this Spirit more than Mason, but whence then doth he walke so, Gal. 2.11.14. as to deserve a reproof.

Nay goe to others who were guided extraordinarily: Isaac by a prophetical Spirit, and infallible, blessed Iacob, but he mis­took in the person whom he blessed, he thought it had been Esau: the infallible Spirit did not guide him there to know Jacob, but he erred as to his owne purpose. Samuel went to anoint David by an infallible Spirit, but he mistook in Eliab. So Nathan a Prophet, but he mistook in his counsell to David about the Temple building. Then why the Spirit should so teach every Minister that in no point whatever he should mis­take (so long as in nothing that concern the salvation of his people) I know not.

Much more might be gathered out of their Books, whereby it may appear by what spirit these Quakers are led, truely by Sa­tan, scarce transformed into an Angel of Light.

And now to you who are my people, and have chosen me to [Page 54]be your Officer, having thus opened the wickednesse of this Sect, I exhort you to beware of them: for you who have un­derstanding so as you are able to oppose them, I doe not fear your going to hear them, or conferring with them, they are scarce men in reason: for you who are of the weaker sort, I exhort you again, come not neer them so much as to hear them, (since warning is given what they are) but if you will doe it, know assuredly, the Church will proceed against you for so do­ing, as for any other sinne.