The reviler rebuked: or, A re-inforcement of the charge against the Quakers, (so called) for their contradictions to the Scriptures of God, and to their own scriblings,: which Richard Farnworth attempted to answer in his pretended Vindication of the Scriptures; but is farther discovered, with his fellow-contradictors and revilers, and their doctrine, to be anti-Scriptural, anti-Christian, and anti-spiritual. By John Stalham, a servant of the great bishop and shepherd of souls, appointed to watch his little flock at Terling in Essex.

(20▪ Head of their Scripture-contradiction) Concerning Questions.

Section 48.

I Am very well contented to read a Recantation about Questions; if it prove so practically, that they will as well allow of our questioning them, as they expect we should attend, or answer any of their Queries. In Scot∣land, as I said, Questions were cryed down, as of the Devil, and as so many snares: R. F. owneth Questions in their place, he saith * 1.1, But such as are of the Devil, we deny. Agreed thus far: But to hold our agreement, we had need know what are the Questions that are set in due place, or what is the due place for Questions, and what are the Que∣stions that are of the Devil, what not? I gave forth some information in my former Collection, touching the persons questioning, and questioned, the principle, and end, maner, as matter of the Question. In Reply to R. F.

1. As to owning Questions in their place, I must tell* 1.2 him, (if he be a member of a Family) it is a fit place, for superiors to ask, and inferiors to answer Questions; and also for wives, lovingly, to ask Questions (as the Apostle saith) of their husbands at home, (whatsoever tropical gloss R. F. would put upon the words, 1 Cor. 14. 35.) as for chil∣dren and servants, humbly and dutifully, to propound their doubts, and desire resolution of their parents and govern∣ors, Exod. 12. 26. And it suteth my place of a Replicant, to ask him, whether he, and others of his way, do own cate∣chizing, and instructing by way of Question and answer, in the Family? Again, I must tell him, it is a fit place for him and his fraternity, to answer to the Questions of Magistrates, but I have known some of them refuse to answer unto such things as have been propounded in the pursuit of truth and peace. It was also a fit place for one of them to have an∣swered, when he had asked a godly Pastor of a Church in

Suffolk, Art thou for trembling? and the Minister had told him, he would answer him that Question, if he would answer him another; to which proposal he made a promise, but per∣formed it not▪ for when the Minister had told him, he did own trembllng; but withal added, to this effect; I read of Moses trembling at the foot of mount Sinai; and of Sauls trem∣bling when the Devil appeared in the shape of Samuel; and of the Devils trembling; and of the Saints working out their Salvation with fear and trembling; the Question was, which of these sorts of trembling he owned; at which, the man turn'd his back, and went his way discontented and speechless, as if he had been strangled, as sometime Christ put the Sadduces to silence, Mat. 22. 34. the Greek word is* 1.3 as much as haltered; alluding to beasts that have bits or halters put in their mouths, or muzzles upon their chaps, to keep them from biting or doing mischief. I asked J. Par∣nel once, whether he was not bred and educated among ignorant Papists, but could have no answer: it is fit that Question should be answered by some, but it was a silencing Question to him. If I should ask R. F. as I have reason so to do, whether he be not employed (with some others) by Satans Engineers, as a cane, for some Jesuit or Socinian to blow through, and fly-blow the truths of God, about the Scriptures, the Spirit, the Ministery of Christ, &c. It is a dubious case whether he will candidly answer to it; or, what he meant by his answer to his late masters Question, Art thou Christ? whereto he said, I am, how he can, with∣out blasphemy, make it out: Or, if I should ask him, whe∣ther he writes any Scripture truth, in love of the Scripture, or onely to catch and cavil, I doubt whether I should not have some of his old ware vended; for all his pack is not yet emptied, unless God restrain and stop his mouth, and dry up his pen and inkhorn terms.

2. As to his, and his fellows denying such Questions as are* 1.4 of the Devil, I wish they would make good this denial: But since I heard in Scotland, that Questions were of the Devil, I have read of many Questions of theirs, which come from no better spirit, then the old Serpent and Satan: The Que∣stion is, whether R. F. will own them as of God, or deny

them as being of the devil? I read in one * 1.5 of their Pam∣phlets, to this purpose, Whether you, that say bread and wine (i. e. in our Lords Supper) is the body and blood of Christ, be not they that minde earthly things, and are carnal and natu∣ral? In my poor judgement, this Question is from igno∣rance of the Lords purpose in his instituted Supper, which calls upon us to minde spiritual and heavenly things, by what are earthly and natural, i. e. bread and wine in their substance, but spiritual in their signification and use, during the celebration: and unsavory this Question is to such as truly own the remembrance of Christ in that Ordinance. Again they Quere * 1.6, Whether every one may not purchase bread and wine, and whether any can purchase the body and blood of Christ for money? Now, if ignorant, unsavory, vain, needless, and unprofitable Questions come of the Devil, and R. F. denieth such, will he deny this to be any other? If he saith, he yields it to be vain, &c. his fellows do not, he must then, herein at least, deny them; if he maintains it for good, he must so prove it: I judge it to be (as the former) ignorant and unsavory; in that it ariseth from the not di∣stinguishing between the inward and outward part of the Lords Supper; and needless, vain, and unprofitable, because not tending to edification, but meerly to strife and vain jangling. Another tempting and upbraiding Question * 1.7 there is, Whether ever any of you received the substance since that which you called the sign was practised by you, and so bear witness to the substance, and deny the sign, yea, or nay? The scope of this indeed is diabolical, to throw off the sign of Christs appointment, when they come to feel the substance; whereas, the true method of Christians, is first to receive the substance, Christ in the promise, before they joyn with the Church to receive the sign (because the Ordinance of the Supper is not a converting Ordinance, if we speak of the true initial work) for confirming and carrying on of the work of faith, and love, holiness, &c. And, if none should receive the sign and memorial of Christs death, after they have by faith in the Gospel-promise received the substance, they should, orderly, never receive the sign at all. How insolent and ignorant a Question is that? * 1.8 Whether do you

wait and believe to be made heirs with Christ, yea, or nay? and to have the same minde which was also in Jesus Christ, who thought it no robbery to be equal with God? whether you witness this, yea, or nay? Will R. F. acknowledge the sub∣tilty and wickedness of this Quere (say I) yea, or nay? For the blessed Apostle, Phil. 2. 5, 6, 7. presseth to the same* 1.9 humble minde that was in Jesus Christ, who, being in the form of God (that is left out in the Question) thought it no robbery, &c. But made himself of no reputation, &c. all that in ver. 7, and 8. should have been added, if the Question had not been snarling, and contradictious to the Apostles scope; which is far from teaching Christians (as is the intent of the Question) to aspire after any such thought, as to be equal with God: we may know and be∣lieve our heir-ship and coheir-ship with Christ in glory, and yet stoop to mean estates and conditions, with low mindes here on earth, and carry no such proud thought to heaven, as the Question doth insolently dictate. Is this the perfe∣ction these men talk of, to harbor proud thoughts in their bosoms, of being equal with God, because Christ thought it no robbery so to be? Oh ye deceived professors! lift not up your horns on high; speak not with a stiff neck, beyond the Donatists of old, or as the Familists of later times, but remember those who were nick-named Puritans in Queen Elizabeths days, and since, for their sincere endeavors af∣ter Purity; be humble (in the midst of failings) as they were, and forsake the tents of these Corahs, Dathans, and Abirams, or worse; who not onely think themselves as per∣fect as Saints in heaven, but hope hereafter (if they be not here) to be equal in perfection and glory with God. Lord, rebuke this Blasphemy in all thine, and convince all obstinate gain-saying Questionists, which is not in our power to do, but instrumentally we desire to be subservient in the work, according to thy word, Titus 1. 9. To pro∣ceed,* 1.10 I shall instance but in another Pamphlet, (for their Questions are endless, and to attend the Answers would be a needless endless work) As R. F. denies Questions that are of the Devil, I hope he will not deny most ignorant and proud Questions to be of the Devil, (as from old Adam also) as

that for one, * 1.11 What rule have you in Scripture for putting off the Hat? That this Question ariseth from pride, appear∣eth by another, Quest. 20. in the same Book, Page 20. Whe∣ther is it for the Lords sake, that a man would have his fel∣low-creature stand with his Hat off before him, or for his self∣sake? Fellow-creatures, they think, must be all alike in ho∣nor. This might be the thought of those creatures that are now Devils, which made them Devils; and by the 21. Quest. He that for the Lords sake, &c. cannot bow to a creature, whether ought he to be imprison'd for mis-behavior, or a con∣temner of Authority, yea or nay? The first Question bewray∣eth ignorance, which if R. F. justifies, he must be sent to the Catechism, out of Exod. 20. 12. and asked, what is the fifth Commandment, and what it meaneth? and what Rom. 13. 7. Render honor to whom honor is due. I hope R. F. will grant that quarrelling Questions are of the Devil, as was that, Job 1. 9. Doth Job serve God for nought? such is that in the fore-mentioned Pamphlet * 1.12, Whether is your Gospel free and without charge, as the Apostles was, yea or nay?

For, 1. To clear God; He will not let his servants serve him for nought.

2. To clear his servants; This I say again (as before, Sect. 44.) they may serve with a free spirit, yet take wages, (whereof the Laborer is worthy) for they serve not the Lord in the ministery for wages. It is one thing (as I have said elsewhere) to take hire for preaching, another thing to preach for hire. By the Scripture, that Question also * 1.13 may be judged proud and malitious, as of the Devil; What rule have you in Scripture to take a Text, &c. If R. F. justi∣fies this (as 'tis likely he will) we must bid him go and learn, and what that meaneth, Luke 4. 17. our humble Saviour took up the Bible, and pitcht upon a Text; let us learn, at last, of him to be lowly in heart, Matth. 11. 29. If it be said, it followeth in the Question, and to speak from it what you have studied, with your Ʋses, Points, Tryals, Motives, and Applications? We must send them again to 2 Tim. 3 16, 17. The Scripture is given so to be improved, whether men will hear or forbear. Let R. F. consider, if the scope of that * 1.14 Question [Whether that Light which comes from Christ be

natural, yea or nay?] be not to make all Light-given alike for kinde? as appeareth by Quere 29. Whether the Light of the world (or of every man) be not a saving Light in the least measure, yea or nay? and how can that be said to be na∣tural? These Questions come from the Devils envy against the Saints peculiar light, who see all things after another maner then natural men can do. The Gentiles did things by nature, or power of natural conscience, and the light of it; which yet they perisht in; their light and their works were neither of them saving, Rom. 2. 12, and 14. This light of na∣ture comes from Christ as God, not as Mediator: he that is the true Light, enlightneth every man, but not with saving Light; I must send back R. F. to Sect. 10. and the super∣added Conclusions, in the end thereof. If any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant, 1 Cor. 14. 38. But yet if we examine those Questions, * 1.15 Where had you this Doctrine, to tell people they could never be wholly cleansed, or be set free from sin, so long as they are upon the earth? And, whether this be not in opposition to the Doctrine of Christ, who saith, Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect? What shall we finde here but ignorance and confusion? for want of will or skill, to distinguish between Justification and Sancti∣fication, which, according to the Scripture, I have desired R. F. and others, to perpend and weigh in Sect. 23. And I must send all Novices still to that Scripture, Eccles. 7. 20. There is not a just man upon earth that doth good, and sin∣neth not; which hath no opposition to the Doctrine of Christ, Mat. 5. 48. where the Lord (as all along the Chapter)* 1.16 urgeth sincerity and integrity of obedience upon his Disci∣ples (in opposition to the Pharisees counterfeit and partial expositions of the ten Commandments) with further growth and endeavour after more conformity to their heavenly pat∣tern; still keeping perfection in all degrees, as the white in their eye, unto which the Lord will bring his children at their dissolution, and time of their souls immediate entrance into heaven, and not before, as hath been demonstrated in Sect. 29. As to that Question, * 1.17 What is your own righte∣ousness, and what is the righteousness of Christ, and how do you distinguish betwixt the one and the other? He that did pro∣pound

it, tells us (at the foot of Page 25.) It was not as if he knew them not, (even all that he enquired of) but for the satisfaction of the simple, and for the clearing of the truth, and manifesting our deceit to the world. But that which is a thorough good Question indeed, not coming from Satan, and a corrupt heart, must arise from a sound and good prin∣ciple, and be propounded to as good an end: Now, this Quere, 1. proceeds not from a good principle, because their judgements are vitiated, and in their Doctrine they con∣found (as do the Papists) our inherent righteousness-sancti∣fying, with Christs righteousness which justifieth. Christs righteousness, which justifieth a believing sinner, is not the essential righteousness of his God-head, but that obedience of his, Active and Passive, which in the humane nature (that he assumed, and united to his divine person) he wrought out in the room and stead of others; and which, he presenting to Gods Justice, as a price and ransom for them, God accept∣eth, and reckoneth to every one that believeth for his per∣fect Justification. That righteousness which is in Scripture called our own, as inherent in us; is, either what is done by the power of natural conscience, without the written word; or, what is done according to the bare letter of the written command; or, from a common gift of the Spirit; or, in a Gospel-way, from a living principle of grace, habits and acts of holiness, by the holy Spirit and faith, given, stirred up, actuated, and improved; this also (with all the former) is a righteousness of ours, that men would establish in the room of Christs imputed righteousness, for their justificati∣on: But though it be wrought by the strength of Christ in us, and be found in us, that are sanctified; yet, as to justi∣fication of his person, Paul would not be found in it for a world; but, saith he, Phil. 3. 8, 9. I do count all things but loss (even what he had done and suffered, since conversion, and what he was now a doing) and dung, that I may win Christ; and be found in him, not having mine own righte∣ousness, which is of the Law, (or done in my person, from the best principles in obedience to the Law) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith; this is every true Believers vote and resolu∣tion.

If R. F. be otherwise minded, and belong to God, God shall reveal even this unto him.

2. The above mentioned Quere, by the bare propound∣ing doth not attain the ends pretended: our answer may satisfie some simple ones, some wise, not all: This Quere (and other of the like stamp) doth but obscure the truth, and help to stagger and seduce Gods servants; as for our deceit, in this great business of a sinners justification; if J. Parnell should arise from the dead, or R. F. should tell us he hath been in the third Heaven; nor one, nor other shall be able to manifest that which is not. To conclude, whence came that* 1.18 question, quarrelling more with God, then with us? How doth it stand with the impartial God, to give to one man a measure of grace, and not to another, and yet require obedience from all? If R. F. thinketh, there is ground for such a Question, he must be sent to Rom. 9. 18. 20. for his Answer; God hath mercy on whom he will have mercy &c. and, O man, who art thou that replyest against God?

Notes

• * 1.1

  Page 23.
• * 1.2

  Fit place for Questions and Answers.
• * 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.4

  What Questi∣ona are of the Devil.
• * 1.5

  A Declara∣tion against Popery, Quere 6.
• * 1.6

  Quere 10.
• * 1.7

  Quere 21.
• * 1.8

  Quere 27.
• * 1.9

  Phil 12. 5. &c vindicated.
• * 1.10

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.11

  Fruits of a Fast. pag. 19.
• * 1.12

  page 22.
• * 1.13

  page 22. Qu. 4.
• * 1.14

  Qu. 24.
• * 1.15

  Qu. 44 and 45.
• * 1.16

  Mat. 5 48. vindicated.
• * 1.17

  Qu 48.
• * 1.18

  Quer. 3••.