Wit and their Time to Gloss and Cover their Errors which does but Expose them the more And since they now do pretend in Discourse and otherwise to be the same with the Church of England in Faith and Doctrine that they wou'd with a Noble and a Christian Courage Fairly and Above-board Retract and Condemn whatever they have said or wrote to the Contrary This is Incumbent upon them to Rescue the many Souls Deluded by them For that they are so Deluded none can deny I have many times heard several of them some of their Preachers plainly own all the Gross things Charged upon them even Denying any Merit or Salvation by the Blood of Christ which was outwardly shed That Christ is now a Man That there will be any Resurrection of our Dead Bodys or Future Universal Judgment Now where did they Learn these Doctrines There are none of any other Communion who believe few that ever heard of such things Therefore it is certain that these have been Deluded And who have Deluded them And nothing will undeceive them but seeing their Leaders downright Retract these Errors While they seem to excuse them they Confirm their Ignorant Followers in them Whose Blood will be requir'd at their Hands if they do not all that is in their Power to retrieve them What shall I say more To my Perswasions I will add my Prayers for them Which I do daily offer for their Conversion And thus to God and his Mercy I leave them through Jesus Christ who shed his Blood for them Dyed Rose and Ascended OVTWARDLY and will in the same Body come again to Judge them In which Day may they hear a Favourable sentence from Him and with us be one with him to all Eternity Amen Oct. 14. 1696. SOME GLEANINGS WITH Other further Improvements I. 1. THomas Ellwood is not onely Chargeable with what he has wrote in this Answer which has been Examined but the whole Body of the Quakers except Turners-Hall and those in Communion with them because it has been approved of by The second days Meeting as all Books are that they give forth which is their Supreme Authority in such Cases 2. Looking over his Answer again I cannot but Remark a Bold stroke of his p. 34. Thomas Danson being a Presbyterian Minister said G. Keith did Head that Christ as Man had a Creaâ—ed Soul Nay hold there Replies T. E. Thom. Danson spake of the Son of God i. e. That Christ is not the Son of God If he thinks to come off by that Limitation in Danson's words As Man it will not Rescue him For even As Man He was The Son of God Luk. 1.35 And as to his Eternal Generation He was the Son of God from all Eternity Therefore T. E. is to tell us in what sense he oppos'd Christ's being The Son of God And with the assurance of a Nay hold there As if some great Absurdity had been coming upon him II. 1. I told you in my Conclusion of the great Ignorance of the Generality of the Quakers And that many of them do at this day plainly own the most Blasphemous and Heretiâ—â— Doctrines which have been objected against them And thence I infer'd that whatever Face their Writers since the late Controversâ— against them have put upon their Principles yet this shews undeniably that such Heresies have been taught amongst them and are still so understood by their People And that vehemently A present Preacheâ— of theirs not long since being Pressed to acknowledge the Man Christ without us and the necessity of Faith in him Answered The Man Christ a F rt Horrid It Astonishes to Repeat such disdainful Blasphemy Tho it be necessary towards undeceiving of the World I know the Man and to whom he said it He deny'd before me and several others at another time That Christ's Body Rose out of the Grave That our Bodys should Rise That there wou'd be any General Judgment Or that the Scriptures were all True This is a Teacher Thus he has been Taught And thus he Teaches others And it is no wonder that they who are thus Taught to believe no outward Christ now in being shou'd use him with the utmost Contempt And his Worshippers with the greatest severity as being the Grossest sort of Idolaters to worship a Dead God who is no more in Being But the Quakers Faith is in an Inward Christ Viz. Their Light within And Inward Blood Inwardly shed c. 2. Can outward Blood Cleanse the Conscience Says Isaac Pennington in his Questions to the Professors p. 25. Was it the Flesh and Blood of the Vail or the Flesh and Blood within the Vail I have before observed that they call Christ's Body the Vail or Garment which he wore without taking it into his own Nature or being any Part of Christ For say they in a Book Compos'd by a great Club of them Intituled Some Principles of the Elect People of God in scorn called Quakers Printed 1671. p. 116. The Scriptures do expresly distinguish between Christ and the Garment which He wore between Him that came and the Body in which He came between the substance which was Vailed and the Vail that Vailed it There was the outward Vessel and the Inward Life This we certainly know say they and can never call the Bodily Garment Christ So that the Blood of Christ's Body was none of His Blood it was but the Blood of his Garment or Vail which the Quakers do not acknowledge to be Christ And which Isaac Pennington says cannot Cleanse the Conscience What Blood then is it which Cleanses Not the blood of the Vail that is of Christ's Body but The Flesh and Blood within the Vail i. e. of the Spirit which was within Christ's Body And this Spiritual Blood must be Spiritually that is Inwardly and not visibly shed This totally excludes the outward Christ and the outward Blood from having any Efficacy towards our Salvation Which Isaac Pennington explains yet fuller ibid Was it says he The Flesh and Blood of the outward Earthly Nature or the Flesh and Blood of the Inward Spiritual Nature Was it the Flesh and Blood which Christ took of the First Adam's Nature or the Flesh and Blood of the Second Adam's Nature This is Nonsense for Christ himself was the Second Adam and this Quere is whether he took Flesh and Blood of His own Nature But by the Second Adam the Quakers mean onely the Eternal word of God exclusive of the Humane Nature And they plainly here Exclude the Flesh and Blood which Christ took of the First Adam's Nature 3. Pursuant to this Notion the Quakers do not confine this Blood not â—â— the Vail i. e. Of Christ's Body but the Blood within the Vail i. e. the Mâ—stical Blood of the Spirit that dwelt in the Body of Christ they do not Confine this Blood to Christ alone but say that it is in themselves for they make iâ— to be nothing else than The Light within And from hence they
being both his Prosecutors and Judges And since he came to England he has been Persecuted with the strife of Tongues Excommunicated and Ruin'd as much as in their Power who before did highly Honour and Support him Nor has he put himself in any other way that might Ballance these Losses So that he has visibly gone against his Worldly Interest And what other Motive cou'd he have but Conscience to Enable him in a single War against so Many and such Potent Adversaries But he Fought for the great Fundamentals of the Christian Religion which the Quakers had vilely cast away And than Spirit which Inspir'd them has Arm'd all their Rage against him But the Truths which he contends for has Prevail'd so far against them as to force them to at least a Feigned Complyance with the Doctrine that he Teaches which they Pretend always to have held as he now does And thereby Condemn their Excommunication of him â— unjust since they have Publickly at â—urners-Hall Declar'd that they had no objection against him as to his Morals 7. T. E. often calls upon G. K. for a Reply to his Truth Defended which he wrote in Answer to a Book of G. Keiths called A List of Vile and Gross Error c. But T. E. shou'd first have given a Full Answer to that Book and to another Book of G. K's called Gross Error and Hypocrisie Detected which T. E. pretends to Answer in this present Answer to the Naratinâ— Particularly p. 20 21. Where G. K disputes against this the very Fundamental Error of Quakerising which is Transferring the Merit and Satisfaction of the outward Sufferings and Sacrifice of the outward Christ to their Fancy'd Sacrifice and Sufferings of the Inward Christ or Light within G. K. there produces their own words as justify'd by W. Penn G. Whitehead c. Viz. Christ in us offereth himself a Living Sacrifice to God for us by which the wrath of God is appeased to us And again Christ offers himself In his Children in the Nature of a mediating Sacrifice To this says G. K. I will set down his words because they are short and Material â— satisfaction be totally Excluded which are W. P's words before Quoted because a Sin or Debt cometh both Paid and Forgiven what â—â—d is 〈◊〉 is there of a Mediating Sacrifice of Christ within Men more that without them Secondly seeing it is the Nature of all Sacrifices for Sin that they be slâ—â—n and their Blood shed how is Christ slaâ—â— in his Children and when For we Read in Scripture that Christ â—â—â—th in the Faithful as he did in Paul but not that he is slain in them Thirdly If any slaâ— the 〈◊〉 of Christ in them by their Sâ—ns doth not that hinder the Life to be a Sacrifice by G. Whitehead's Argument That the Killing of a Christ outwardly being the Act of Wicked Man cou'd be no â—eritorious Act Fourthly Where doth the Scripture say Christ offers 〈◊〉 self In hâ—s Children a Sacrifice for 〈◊〉 Fifthly Is not this to make more â—acrifices or at least to say that Christ offer himself often yea Millions of tiâ—â—s contrary to Scripture that saith Christ offered himself once Sixthly Why cou'd no Beast under the Law that had a Blemish be offered but to signify that Christ was to offer up himself in no other Body but that which was without Sin Seventhly Why was it Prophesied of Christ A Body hast thou Prepared me why not Bodies many if he offer up himself in the Bodys of all the Saints Eightly Is not this to make thâ— Sacrifice of Christ in his own Body of less value and Efficacy than his Sacrifice in W. Penn's Body Because the sacrifice in that Body which was offered at Jerusalem was a Type but this in W. Penn's Body the Anti-Type That the History This the Mystery As he calls iâ— in his Answer to John Faldo p. 336. 337. Ninthly Doth not this strengththen the Papists in their false Faith That Christ is daily offered in the Mass and Vn-bloody Sacrifice Now T. E. in his Truth Defended p. 148. Falls upon defending W. P. for calling Christ but the History and the Light within the Mistery after his usual manner of making the matter still worse But very civilly slips all the rest above Quoted which is the Jugulum Causae the very Heart of our Controversy with the Quakers And yet calls his Book an Answer to G. K. and Insults because he has not got a Replication But he must first amend his Long-short Answer Or let him put in an Additional Answer as to the Nine Reasons above nam'd against their Inward Sacrifice And then we will come with him when he pleases upon the Merits of the Cause III. 1. I have before taken notice of the great Moderation and stay'd Judgment of the Quakers in not Rashly passing Judgment upon any without duely and seriously weighing the Consequence of the Charge and the Defence of the Accused and the utmost Good meaning that cou'd be put upon words Of which T. E. shews a Remarkable instance p. 124. of his Answer Where in Return to G. K. who wou'd have had them to have Censur'd as Blasphemous that Doctrine of a Prophet of their own Sol. Eccles. Viz. That the Blood of Christ was no more than the Blood of another Saint T. E. Answers That if G. Whitehead to whom G. K. spoke had been as Hot Headed as G. K. perhaps he might But that Blasphemy is an High Charge and they that understand it aright are not so Forward as G. K. it seems wou'd be to Brand Persons with it for every unsound expression When I Quoted this above I laid before these Moderate Men how freely they had Branded all the Christian World for they have greater Tenderness towards the Heathen whom they make the next True Christians to themselves as Apostates Blasphemers Devils Conjurers c. For making the outward Christ an object of their Faith I will now shew you what other weighty Causes they have Decreed to be Blasphemy Viz. Any opposition whatsoever made to Them or their Diana the Light within In a Renowned Book of theirs Intituled The West Answering to the North. Printed 1657. Containing some of the Travels and Labours of their Fox Apostle and other of his Cubs there is 〈◊〉 down p. 1. A Blasphemous Bantering Paper of his turning the Christ to the Light within which will bring you says he off all the Worlds Teachers and Ways and Doctrines i. e. Off all the Doctrines and Teachers in the World All that Preach an outward Christ Which Paper being justly call'd Sinful and Wicked Than which says the said Book p. 12. What Higher Blasphemy is there greater Abomination or more Horrible Wickedness Take another Instance One William Rogers a Quaker of Bristol happen'd to differ with the other Quakers about their Womens Meetings Concerning Leaving Friends at Liberty to Pay Tythes if their Light so directed and some such other things And he wrote a Book upon
these Subjects which he call'd The Christian Quaker Against whom one Christopher Taylor Wrote what he stiles An Epistle of Caution to Friends Printed 1681. Where p. 4. he says And for his Calling his Book The Christian Quaker c. It is Notoriously Blasphemous Now this W. Rogers was then and is still a Quaker And at this day in Communion with them and own'd by them as one of the Friends But no matter for all that If he touch upon the Authority of the Quakers Inquisition or Plead for the Original Freedom of the Light in Particular Persons by which they throw off all Lawful Authority against the In-Errable Sanhedrin of Grace-Church-street if any be who he will Dare turn their Cannon upon themselves it is Notorious Blasphemy Or to Censure one word of G. Fox's Infallible Dictates what Higher Blasphemy What Greater Abomination What more Horrible Wickedness But if a Friend who submits Implicity to their Church and will not dispute Her Authority shall say or Preach or Print That the Blood of Christ is no more than the Blood of another Saint And this shou'd be Tax'd as Blasphemous O then have a Care Blasphemy is an Heavy Charge And they that understand it aright are not so Forward as G. K. it seems wou'd be to Brand Persons with it for every unsound Expression What one said severly of the Church of Rome That there was but one Sin in her Communion viz. To oppose the Authority of the Church Is much more true of the Quaker-Church which Asserts her Authority Higher and requires a more Implicite obedience than Pope or Conclave So far are they gone from the Original Principle by which they seduc'd Men from under all other Church-Authority Viz. The sufficiency and Independency of the Light in every Particular Person And consequently That all outward Impositions were Anti-Christian But that Principle like the Fair Pretences of Vsurpers is onely Calculated to Begin a Rebellion and withdraw our obedience from those to whom it is due Till they can get into the Saddle But then like Scaffolding it must stand no longer And such Deluded Subjects find when 't is too late That they have Chang'd their Masters But not their Slavery 2. This will appear yet more in the Quaker severity against those who dare to Speak or Write against them who shall Presume so much as to Countenance or any ways Contribute towards the least Mutiny or Rebellion from their Authority They fell upon the Printer one John Bringhurst a Quaker who Printed that Book above-Nam'd of W. Rogers's till he was forc'd to Sign a Condemnation of himself for what he had done Which he has Printed and Prefixed with his Name to it to C. Taylor 's Epistle of Caution mention'd before And so made his Peace But John Barnet a Quaker-Merchant who had sold some of W. Rogers's Books And refus'd to Sign such an Instrument of Condemnation against himself according to their Discipline because he had done it as the Printer too alledged before their Church had Censur'd it And being wrote by a known Quaker And the Title of The Christian Quaker upon it there was no Ground to suspect it Yet all that wou'd not do he must without disputing come under them And Condemn himself tho he thought himself Innocent Which because he was not free to do they without more Ceremony Excommunicated him and he stands still Excommunicated ever since the 4th Day of the Eleventh Month. 1681. On which Day their Brutun Fulmâ—n bears Date and was given forth from The Monthly Meeting at Demonshire-House And it bears no other Crime against J. B. But his felling of this Book which they said was Prejudicial to the Truth by Corrupting Peoples Mâ—nds tending also to draw them into Disesteem of many of the Lords Servants c. For it told of some of G. Fox's Tricks and others And which was Intolerable Prov'd what he said For which The Epistle of Câ—â—ion above-nam'd Pâ—â—â— Says mildly This Cursed Spirit of Satan is now entered into the Heart and Soul of W. Rogers and such of his Abettors as own the Printing and Publishing of his wicked Bâ—ok aforesaid wherein he has Accused the Faithful Brethren at Large If he had onely said That Christ was no more than anâ—ther Man he had come off and been Excus'd by the whole Fraternity and Reperenc'd as well as Solomon Eccles But to Level G. Fox with other Mortals Or touch the Faithfull Brethren To draw Men into Disâ—esteem of these the Lords Servants This was no less than Blasphemy And to be Prosecuted without Mercy And not onely Authors but Printers and Publishers must be struck with their Ecclesiastical Tâ—under But in Pensilvania where the Law was in their own hands this did not serve turn For there they gave forth Carnal Warrants Seiz'd and Imprison'd Printers and Publishers of what was wrote against them And improv'd it like other Inquisitors to a Design against the Government and Try'd some of them for their Lives But their Chief Governor being superseded and Colonel Fletcher a Church of England Man coming in his Room before they had run through all the For as of their Process he put a sudden stop to their Proceedings and this has left us onely to Guess whether all they did was meerly out of Love and but In Terrorem to Fright their opposers into Better manners However some were Ruin'd by it and William Bradford the Printer forc'd to â—ly out of their Dominions to New York where he now Lives If you wou'd know what was the Cause of all this wrath It was onely for Expostulating with them whether their Granting Commissions and â—iring Indians to Fight for the Recovery of a Sâ—â—p the Pâ—â—ates had taken from them was not contrary to their formerly declar'd Principle of the Vn-Lawfulness of using the Carnal weapon tho â—n their own defence This they constru'd to be an Implicite Dis-Arming the Government of the Right or Power to Muntaâ—â— it self And by this Innuendo they Prosecuted Printers Publishers c. As above is told Of which there are full Narratives and the tryals in Print Published by the Persons concernâ—d to which I refer the Reader 3. But tho they Guarded so severely against any Printing or Publishing against themselves Yet they restrained not to Print and Publish every day most virulent Invectives against the other Protestants and dispers'd them by order of their Yearly Meetings for the Propagation of Truth as they called it And not onely what they cou'd do themselves against us but they took pains to Re-Print and Publish the Bitterest and most Venemous Darts which the Church of Rome threw at the Protestants especially of the Church of England And that visibly with Approbation and siding with them against the Protestants There was a Man of great Name among the Quakers Josiah Coal who wrote a Book call'd The Whore un-vailed Printed 1665. Wherein he undertakes to prove the Quakers to be the true Church against the Church of Rome
But then having Conquer'd Rome as he thought he brings them in Aid with him against the Protestants and borrows Arrows out of their Quiver Bare fac'd and above board He Re-Printed a Scandalous Label of one A. S. a Roman Catholick against the Church of England and also the rest of the Protestants which he says he leaves them to Answer They the Quakers not being concern'd This Label is Printed in a Larger Character than the Rest of his Book to make it more Conspicuous and is mention'd in his Title Page that none might overlook it It begins at p. 48. of his Book And calls the Protestant Clergy especially of the Church of England in the compass of two Lines p. 49. Intruders Thieves and â—obbers Hypocrites Ravenous Wolves and Murtherers Sons of Belial False Prophets and Priests of Baal These are the very words of G. Fox and the rest of the Quakers the sweet Appellations which they bestow upon all the Protestant Clergy And here we may see whence they have Learn'd them Page 50 That Senseless and Prophane Papist A. S. Blasphemes our Holy Bible And describes the Hypocritical Intruders so he stiles our Clergy â—â—â—ing in a Pulpit or Tub i. e. Both Conformists and Non Conformists with such a Brazâ—n Fac'd Book as is their unjust Corrupt and Perverse Bible in their Hand Lulling the â—our Ignorant People to the sleep of Death c. But are the Quakers concern'd at this Intolerable and Blasphemous Contempt of the Holy Bible No. â— of Coal Declares that they are not at all conceâ—n'd on the contrary he Insults p. 40. In this Home thrust which he thought his Confederate A. S. had given to the Sectaries thus he Insolently stiles the Protestants their Bibles and Ministers c. Whose cause saith he I am not ingag'd in therefore it doth not Concern me to Answer his Charges against them but leave them to Answer for themselves Now why shou'd these Men be Reputed as Protestants They count themselves none of us who are not concern'd on our Part no not against the Church of Rome But draw their Arms against us who joyn with them not onely against our Ministers but our Bibles Why shou'd these be Reputed as Christians Can they be Christians who Blaspheme the Holy Bible Or have they another Bible than ours I wou'd earnestly Recommend to them that needful Caution Mat. VI. 23. If the Light that is in thee be Darkness And surely their Light within is Darkness who joyn with the most Ignorant and Bigotted of the Romish Emissaries against our Bible which the Learned among them do know not to differ in any thing that is Material from their own Vulâ— Latin Translation And what are they but under-journey-men to Rome who help out the Cry against the Protestant Bible As if we had quite thrown off the Bible or made a New one Which by these means many of the Ignorant and Implicite Papists are made to believe thereby to Create the greater Abhorrence in them against the Protestants And the Quakers do joyn in this with these most Wicked and Malitious of the Church of Rome And we must bear with them in this Tho they will not bear the least Contradiction not onely to their Doctrine but to the Practises of any of their Number who Remain in Vnity with their Church There is an Ancient worthy and most sincere Honest Gentleman John Penyman who had been Inveigl'd with their False Shew and Pretences to Piety Remain'd Zealous in their Communion and suffer'd with them till he discover'd the grossest Immoralities among them Lying Cheating and Foul uncleanness Which having Complain'd of and otherwise Represented to their Superiors tho the Facts cou'd not be deny'd yet wou'd they not censure any that continu'd in their Vnity For which Reason he after long struggling with them to amend their Scandalous vices at last left them and has since tho very modestly detected some of them which has Provok'd their Rage past all Bounds of Decency or Christian Temper See the Post-Script to some of the Quakers contradictions which he has Printed 1696. p. 10. They can find no better Names for him than Grinning Dog Whiffling Cur. The Devils Agent The Devils Drudge The Devils Porter Vassal of Hell and Cursed Serpent and Bond-slave of the Devil And 100 other such Complements which you will find in the Book Quoted in the Margent They call him Vnclean Nasty Spirit Now he is the Neatest old Man and the most In-offensive I think that ever I saw And as far from the least Tincture of Immodesty or any Vn-cleanness as they are from Sincerity and Charity But if he was the Devil's Drudge Agent Porter c. for telling them of their Immoralities are not they Agents or Drudges to the same Master at least to Rome to Vend Publish Re-Print and Recommend the most Virulent of their Invectives against the Protestants and their Bible too To clap them on the Back and Holloo them at us Themselves unconcern'd And Rejoycing in their Victory as they think over us Approving of their Arguments and making use of them against us They Excommunicated J. B. for selling of a Book which they thought might Tâ—nâ— to bring some of their Friends into Dis-esteem As before is told And do's not their Printing and Abetting of the Popish Scandalous Libels against us at least Tend to bring us into Dis-esteem Was it not at least some small sort of Dis-esteem to the Blessed Jesus to make no more of His Blood than of the Blood of another Saint Yet no Reproof no Excommunication for that How Tame is the Church of England that suffers Fox's journal to be Newly Printed and Presented to the Vniversity of Oxford and many other of the works of the Quaker Prophets to be Printed and Re-Printed as oft as they please which not onely send to bring the Church of England and all Protestants into Dis-esteem but downright calls them False Prophets Baâ—l's Priests Dogs Wolves Conjurers Devils c. Nay not onely this but cast the utmost Contempt upon the Person of Jesus our God! Surely if the Church of England should Excommunicate and Prosecute such as either Printed Published or otherwise Encouraged the Quaker Books which throw so much Dirt upon Her her Doctrine and her God the Quakers cou'd not by their own Rule complain of it as any Peâ—secution Yet Complain they wou'd and put it in the Register of their Suffâ—rings IV. 1. In which there are many things as Groundless and many down right Falsehoods Which it is very fit the world shou'd know Because they take great Care to swell this Register and have threatned to publish it to After-Ages when the Facts cannot be disprov'd whereby they hope to make their Sufferings for the Truth as they call it to exceed all the Ten Persecutions And to be more un-deserv'd than the sufferings of Christ himself or of the Apostles As Edward Burrough their second Fillar next to the Great Fox expresses it p. 273.
SATAN Dis-Rob'd From his Disguise of Light OR The Quakers Last Shift to Cover their Monstrous Heresies Laid Fully open IN A REPLY TO Thomas Ellwood 's ANSWER Published the End of Last Month TO George Keith's NARRATIVE OF THE Proceedings at Turners-Hall June 11. 1696. Which also may serve for a REPLY as to the main Points of Doctrine to GEO. WHITEHEAD's Answer to The Snake in the Grass to be published the End of next Month if this prevent it not By the Author of The Snake in the Grass They shall make their own Tongue to fall upon themselves All that see them shall flee away Psal LXIV 8. LONDON Printed for C. Brome at the Gun near the West End of St. Paul's W. Keblewhite at the Swan in St. Paul's Church-Yard and H. Hindmarsh at the Golden Ball over-against the Royal Exchange in Cornhil 1697. TO THE READER 1. THis Reply is short in Comparison of the Answer which consists of 232 pages Yet I think is Full as having omitted nothing that is material 2. I have undertaken this Task neither out of Pique or Favour to either of the Parties herein Engag'd but only so far as the Christian Religion is concern'd between them And therefore as I have Caution'd Sect. I. Num. VII This is not meant as a Defence of Geo. Keith any further than he Defends the Truth of the Christian Faith For which Reason I have wholly omitted All the Personal Reflections cast upon him and the Contradictions which Tho. Ellwood pretends to find in his former Books while he was a Quaker of their Communion to the Doctrines which he now sets up in Opposition to them For since he has in his Narrative acknowledged some Errors in his former Books and promised a Retractation of them we may have Patience till we see what those Errors are which he will confess In the mean time we must acknowledge That he having had an Academic Education and more Learning than is ordinary among the Quakers has by the blessing of God Improv'd it to so good Purpose as to discover those very gross Errors among them which till of late lay hidden from the Eyes of the World 3. Those Errors in their Faith and Doctrine which I have setdown in The Snake in the Grass I have taken out of their most Approved Books especially of George Fox the Head and Founder of their Order And I have been very Punctual in my Quotations Else I should have heard of it before this time Now this Answer of T. Ellwood's tho it be not to The Snake yet it is to the Chief Heresies therein objeâ—â—ed And this being the Defence they have to make if it prove Sophistical Evasive and Unsound for which I Rejâ—r to what follows this will wind up the Controversy and leave to Room to the Quakers but only for Repentance and a Fuâ—l and Free Acknowledgment of their Errors which have kept â—â—em so long Divided from the whole Catholick Church to the Dreadful Peril of their Souls I wish from my Heart that this may be the Answâ—r they will Return But if otherwise I hope they will not take so long time to do it as in Answering The Snake And I desire that they may not Count mean Enemy because I tell them the Truth ERRATA PAg. 15. l. 7. for Yes r. No p. 17. l. 2. r. as to p. 24. l. 16. r. Adversary p. 33. ante penult r. Father p 45. l. 1. r. a Son is p. 47. l. 13. dele shid and instead of it r. So was not Christ's Sacrifice compleated by his Death but by His Blood afterwards shed p. 48. l. 12. for T. G's r. T. E's In the Gleanings Pag. 8. l. 21. r. he Prov'd p. 12. l. 3. for Piously r. Impiously A FULL REPLY to Thomas Ellwood's Answer c. Section 1. 1. THat which makes this Reply so short is only by cutting off the Frivolous and Impertinent Digressions by which T. E. seeks either to â—ire or Divert the Reader from the main stress of the Contest betwixt G. K. and the other Quakers which is their Heretical and Blasphemous Doctrines And this will make my Reply the more Full for being so Short by letting the Reader have a fair View of the Controversie without Interruption or Confusion He spends the first 23 pages in Excusing their not coming to Defend themselves at Turners-Hall as p. 11. because of The King's absence Want of Trade Scarcity of Current Money Reply to the first 23 pages Which might have occasioned a Mobb c. And p. 20. That G. K. did not give Notice what Weapon he intended to use and of what Length that they might have provided themselves accordingly i.e. That he did not in the short Advertisement of half a Sheet which he printed to give Notice of that Meeting set down all the Books and Quotations which he intended to produce against them II. But to come to the Business T.E. p. 26. Justifies this Reasoning of George Whitehead's Who caâ—ls it Non sense to tell of God being Co-Creator with the Father or that God had Glory with God Dâ—es not this imply into Gods and that God had a Father Let the Reader judge says he Now T. E. would makes us believe that G. W. in all this Quarrel'd only with the Particle Co which signifies with viz. That the Word was Creator jointly with the Father Answ 1. Then by this T. E. yields that G. W. did not believe that the Word was a 〈◊〉 with the Father 2 This is the very Language of Scripture John 1.1 The Word was with God and that All things were made by Hug. 3. It is G. W â—s own Language as quoted by T. E. p. 32. The Word in the Beginning and with the Father in His Glory before the world began Therefore G. W. found no Fault with the Particle Co oâ— with because he uses it himself 4. G. W. â—s Reasoning proceeds further than the Particle Co for he argues that God that is the Word could not have a Father and that this would imply Two God's p. 27. T. E. quotes G. W. saying aâ—ain To tell of the word God Co Creator with the Father is all one as to tell of God being Co-Creator with God if the Father be God and this is to make Two Gods Two Creators c. By which it is undenyable that he did not allow the Word to be God or to have a Father T. E. after this quotes several Passages out of other Books of G. W's owning the Divinity of Christ But these if sincerely meant are no Explanation but a Flat Contradiction to this Therefore let these Quakers Detract their Heresies and Blasphemies that is all that is desired of them But in the next place it would be inquir'd what they mean by ascribing Divinity to Christ or the Word This is the Way to Reconcile these Contradictions And intruth I cannot find that they mean by it any Distinction from the Father otherwise than as the Sabellians held a
Forced to start He says that W. P. has this same Notion in other Places So let him But we are now Considering of this Place And if it be Vnsound let him confess and Retract And it is a favour to him not to Pursue those other Places which T. E. quotes out of his other Works They make the Matter still worse and worse as p. 82. where he brings in W. P. Objecting against J. Faldo c. That they made the History i. e. Christ's Incarnation the Greatest Mystery i. e. Greater than the Operation of their Light within And so do all true Christians But W. P. calls the Incarnation of Christ the History and the Light within the Mystery as being Greater 'T is Strange says he in the same place which T. E. quotes i. e. of his Rejoinder p. 336. that should be reputed most mysterious speaking of Christ's Incarnation which was the Introduction to the Mystery i. e. of the Light within and those Transactions i. e. of Christ's outward Sufferings câ—unted most Difficult that were as so many Tacile Representations of what was to be accomplished in Man In short it is to lessen if not totally exclude the True Mystery of Godliness which is Christ Manifested in his Children Here he makes the Light within the True Mystery which Implies the Incarnation and outward Sufferings of Christ were not the True Mystery He calls them but â—acile Representations of the True Mystery i. e. The Light within and but the Introduction to it and wonders that any should think the outward Sufferings of Christ which he calls Those Transactions to be more difficult than the Inward Transactions of the Light in their Hearts And now I wish T. E. Joy of this Book of W. P's which he has call'd in to his Aid But I hasten from this and much more of this sort which I could Produce I likewise pass over several Monstrous Absurdities in T. E's own Notions which he Interposes as not being the subject I am now Pursuing He says p. 83. That Christ's Incarnation was not properly call'd a Mystery from the Perfection of Holiness that was in Him Was it no part of the Mystery or not Properly so that the Fulness of the Godhead the Highest Perfection of Holiness Dwelt Bodily in a Man Is this no Mystery But I proceed He brings a New and his Old Defence for W. P. he says p. 84. It is Plain that the Scope and Prist of thâ—se Words of W. P. was to perswade People not to rest Barely in an Historical Belief of Christs Incarnation But to come to a Living Faith c. But as I have often Reply'd before there being no such People whose Principle it is to Rest Barely upon an Historical Faith none such who oppos'd W. P. therefore it is plain that this is a meer sham pretence only to cover and hide the Broadest of Heresies or Blasphemies that can be spoken But T. E. in the same page to Lessen the Faith in the outward Jesus endeavours to Render it Mighty Easie in comparison of their Inward Light For little of Difficulty says he there is in Barely and Historically believing this i. e. That God sent Christ to Dye for Sinners and to reconcile God to Men by His Death the Common Faith of all that Part of the World called Christian shews wherein all Professions and the most Profligate and Prophane in any Profession doth so Believe it I wish T. E. were not out in his Reckoning i. e. That all these he Names did Really and Truly Believe this even Hâ—storically But that it self though that alone will not do is not so Easie a Matter as he would make it He sees at least we do how Hard a Task it is with the Quakers who will not Believe that the outward Death of Christ was ordain'd as the Satisfaction for their Sin The Socinians do likewise openly oppose this and all the Deists Into which Societies the Greatest Numbers of our open Debauchees do glory to Inlist themselves These call themselves the Beaux Esprits the Men of Sence and Large Thoughts and among the Profligate and Prophane of the Meaner Rank Few if any of them do Really Believe it even Historically or fâ—rget it and never think of it otherwise it would have a Greater Influence upon them For the Historical Faith must be Inseperable from the Saving Faith And indeed the Saving Faith is the Historical throughly Digested and Apply'd And it is often seen that they who do neglect so to aptly it do in time quite lose it And it is Generally Lost amongst the Vicious and Prophane of all sorts so that Few of them are to be found who have even the Historical Faith They Repeat not that they may Believe Matth. 21.32 A Vertuous Life is a necessary Qualification even for a True Belief of Christ Which is a Gift of God Ephes 11.8 And John the Baptist was sent to Preach Repentance as a Necessary Preparation to Receive the Faith of Christ So that this is not so Easie a Matter as T. E. thinks nor Common to the Vicious and Hypocrites who lessen it and slight it as the Quakers have Endeavour'd as T. E. endeavours p. 86. where speaking of his Beloved Heathen-Christians he presses it upon G. Keith That he must grant the Object of their Faith to be not the outward Appearance of Christ in the Flesh but His Inward Appearance and Manifestation in and by His Divine Light Life Word and Power in their Hearts This is Plain Language And this he says must be Granted if we allow that any of them can be saved Which to be sure T.E. do's who gives them the Genus which he thinks the chief Part of Christianity How God will Deal with the Good Moral Heathen who never Heard of Christ I will not determin nor enter into the Secrets of Providence But that they have the Christian Faith by Believing their Light within or that their is any Object of the Christian Faith without the outward Jesus who suffered at Jerusalem is a Quaker Dream and opposit to the whole Tenure of the Gospel And now that I have shewn the difficulty of attaining to the outward and Historical Faith of Christ let me Compare with it the Difficulty which the Quakers Pretend there is in attaining to what they call their Inward Faith in their Light within which as they have Manag'd it is indeed as Difficult as for a Man to run out of his Wits But to Minds Prepar'd for such Enthusiastical Delusions it is as Easie as to think Highly of ones self and construe all the strong Imaginations of their own Brain for Immediate Revelations And of this Method the Easiness may appear from the Qualifications of the Persons most subject to it Ignorance is the true Mother of their Devotion But such a Profound Degree of this Intoxication as Possesses the Generality of Quakers I will grant is not Easie to be Met with or to be found among any other Discrimination of
He was the Seed of the Woman Promised Gen. 3. before He was Made of a Woman and even before any Woman in the World was Made This is New Divinity These Men Dance in the Clouds They have not a Mind to be understood which is a Demonstration that they Mean not as we do and that their Meaning is not Good SECT 2. Of Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed 1. WE come now to the Second Head of G. Keith's Charge which T. E begins to Answer p. 103. which is That the Quakers do Deny Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed And the first Proof is W. Penn who Totally Excludes the Satisfaction of Christ His Argument is from that Petition in the Lord's Prover Forgive no our Debts as we forgive our Debtors From whence W.P. infers That if it is our Duty to forgive without a satisfaction received and that God is to forgive us as we forgive them then is a Satisfaction Totally Excluded But though the Debtor makes no satisfaction yet God has promised to do it in Full Measure Pressed down shaken together and Running over to those who Forgive any thing for His sake So that here is Satisfaction not Totally Excluded But Filled up every to the Brim But how do's T. E. Answer this He says p. 104 105. That W.P. meant only to Exclude a PLENARY or FVLL or RIGID which is the same Satisfaction 1st Every true Satisfaction must be PLENARY else it is no Satisfaction Paying part of a Debt is not a Satisfying of the Debt But 2dly W. P. neither made any such Distinction nor could Intend it For his Argument runs against All Satisfaction He did not mean that we were Commanded to Forgive our Debtors only in part else God was to Forgive us but in part since as he says God is to forgive us as we Forgive them And thence concludes That A Satisfaction i. e. Any Satisfaction is not only Excluded but to shew his Vehemence TOTALLY Excluded T. E. was no Friend to W. P. in mentioning his Sandy Foundation upon this occasion which is wholly Socinian Disputing Expresly against the Holy Trinity and the Satisfaction of Christ Particularly and I Charitably believe that he wishes it had never been wrote and that it may be now Forgotten Therefore I Forbear to Rip it up II. The next Quotation is out of George Whitehead which T E. comes to p. 109. and Repeating the Charge That G. W. blames W. Burnet his Opponent for saying The Blood shed upon the Cross sprinkles the Conscience Sanctifies Justifies Redeems us says That G. W. only Blames him for saying thus as an Absurdity following upon what W. Burnet had said That that Blood was not now in Being Why Do's G. W. believe that that Blood is any otherwise in Being than as W. Burnet did believe He Dare not say so And if not their there was no Contest betwixt Burnet and him upon that Head So that this is Plainly giving us the Go by and all the Consequences which G. W. draws or pretends to draw from that saying of Burnet's are fully Chargeable upon Himself But 2dly I desire the Reader here to take Notice of the Grossest piece of Deceit that perhaps ever he met with For that saying of Burnet's p. 40. of his Book is only his Repetition of it as being the Quakers own Objection against the Efficacy of that Blood which was shed upon the Cross to us now viz. That it was not now in Being and therefore that we could not now be Justified by that which was not in Being To which W. Burnet Answers That though that Blood shed be not in Being that is Supposing but not Granting it yet the Efficacy of that Blood is still in Being and it still speaks in God's Ears and crys aloud for Mercy If Abel 's Blood did cry against the Murderer for Vengeance How much more louder doth the Blood of the Lamb slain cry for Mercy c. Here Burnet only gives way to this Supposition of the Quakers viz. That that Blood was not in Being by way of Concession not as his own Opinion to shew that no Consequence could be drawn from it to favour the Quaker Heresie of Denying Justification by that Blood And yet T. E. concealing of this would put it upon Us That G. W. in Answer to this Place of Burnet did oppose him only for that Supposition and that agreeing Perfectly with him in Justification by that Blood he only shew'd the Ill Consequences of that Supposition which was his own and which he will not no nor T. E. or any other of their Quakers Dare Deny at this Day viz. That that Blood shed upon the Cross is not now in Being This is Turning the Tables upon W. Burnet in such an Impudent Manner that if I had not seen his Book I could not have believed it But 3dly If that Supposition had been W. Burnet's and not the Quakers own it would not Rescue G. W. because he plainly makes the Conclusion his own by Denying Justification by that Blood However justly it is drawn from that supposed Supposition 4thly The Agonies and Passion of Christ upon the Cross are not now in being And this Argument of G. W's will Dissolve all the Merits of His Death to our Justification thereby as well as by His Blood for indeed they are the same But 5thly All these little Cavillings about the Blood of Christ which was shed either before or after His Death are only to Amuse For they Deny any Justification by the outward Christ upon any account In A Serious Apology written by George Whitehead and William Penn printed 1671. p. 148. Repeating a Charge against them in these words That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in His own Person for us wholly without us and therefore Deny the Lord who Bought us To which W. Penn answers in these words And indeed this we Deny and Bodly affirm it in the Name of the Lord To be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which does now Deluge the Whole World If they think to come off by that saying wholly without us I answer that the Meritorious and only Procuring cause of our Justification is wholly without us i. e. By the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in His own Person for us and the Satisfaction which He hath made by His Death and Passion for our Sins But the Application of this to Particular Persons must be Inward by the Operation of His blessed Spirit in our Hearts And this hinders not but rather supposes that the Meritorious Cause is wholly without us i. e. All the Merit is to be Attributed to what Christ hath done and suffer'd for us for we can Merit nothing from God of our selves And not only to Deny this but to call it a Doctrine of Devils c. And that In the Name af the Lord As it shews these Men to be
utter Strangers to the true Principles of the Christian Religion so do's it Deserve an Animadversion which I will spare in this place III. T. E. p. 111. puts the Baptist's Objection against G. W. in these words Now the Quakers would be so far from directing Men to go to the Material Temple at Jerusalem that they make it but a vain thing to look to Jerusalem to the Anti-Type of that Temple viz. to Jesus Christ as he was there Crucified or to that Blood that was there shed for Justification Now says T. E. see the Answer which G. W. gives thus The Quakers see no need of Directing men to the Type for the Anti-Type nor yet to Jerusalem either to Jesus Christ or His Blood And where do the Scriptures say the Blood was There shed for Justification T. E. says in Excuse That there is a Typographical Error in this Passage But do's not Infallibility reach to Writing or Printing as well as Speaking It seems the Quaker Infallibility do's not go throughout But what is this Error Why intread of The Quakers see no need of Directing Men to Jerusalem either To Jesus Christ or His Blood it should have been Either says T. E. For Jesus Christ c. i. e. That Men need not go to Jerusalem For to look For the outward Material Blood which was shed There 1600 Years ago Why was that the Baptist's Meaning T. E. dare not say that The most Superstitious that ever went thither in Pilgrimage never thought any thing so absurd as that 2dly What is the Difference betwixt FOR and TO in this Place To send Men to Jerusalem TO look for Jesus Christ or His Blood or FOR to look for them 3dly Was this Typographical Error ever taken Notice of before No not a word of it though it was Printed in the Year 1663. Were there any Errata of the Press Printed Yes a good many at the End of the Book Was not this among them No. Then surely it was either thought not to be an Erratum or not so Material as Trasmutation for Transmutation and several other Literal Erratas which are there carefully Printed And Trumping it up Now shews the weak Efforts of a Dying Cause like a Drowning Man catching at a Straw which yet do's not save him For as before said this Typographical Error supposing it to be one do's no service at all to his Cause but leaves him just where it found him But what says he to that Expression above quoted Where do the Scriptures say the Blood was there shed for Justification This is a Crabbed Place And though T. E. Repeats it again p. 112. Yet he says not one Word in excuse for it But G. W. lets us see his Opinion fully in the same Book here quoted by T. E. viz. The Light and Life of Christ within Printed 1668. p. 51. where he makes a Dialogue betwixt the Baptist he Disputes against and himself Thus. I ask says G. W. who is He that satisfies and appeaseth God Dischargeth the Guilty and Pays the Debt Bapt. It is the Man Christ Jesus G. W. Whence came He Bapt. God gave Him G. W. And what is this Man Christ Jesus who can Satisfie Pacifie an Infinit God Bapt. He is God-Man born of a Virgin G. W. How would this Divide God and set Him at Distance from Himself Is it good Doctrine to say That God Pacified God when He saw Himself angry For says the Baptist It was God Man that did it Which is all one as to say God Corrected Himself and then He was Mediator to Himself c. Thus G. W. Blasphemously with the Socinians and in their very words Ridicules the Satisfaction of Christ and our Justification by it and shews his utter Ignorance of the true Christian Doctrine Which I stay not now to Dispute My Business being only to Detect these Men That they have Grosly Mistaken it But before I proceed I find my self oblig'd to ask T. E's Pardon For that I said just now while I was considering his page 111. That he Durst not say That the Baptist's meaning against whom he Disputes was to send Men now to Jerusalem to look for the Blood of Christ which was shed There 1600 Years ago as if it were now to be found there And indeed I thought so That neither T. E. or any Man whatever Durst have ventur'd upon a Supposition so Monstrously Absurd But to my great surprize I find reading p. 115. That he Positively and without any Haesitation asserts it That the Baptist did Direct People now to go Thither Jerusalem for it the Blood of Christ there shed or Look thither for it as if it were now to be found there These are his Words I will not take up the Reader 's time to vindicate this Baptist W. Burnet whom T. E. thus accuses but Refer to his Book Intituled The Captital Errors of the People called Quakers Printed 1668. In Answer to which G. W. wrote The Light and Life c. above quoted And it will there appear not only that W. Burnet had no such gross conceit but that he Plainly and Fully Expresses himself to the Contrary viz. That it was the Merit of Christ's Blood and Faith in the Redemption thereby wrought that he contended for and not that the Material Blood which was shed at Jerusalem was Now there to be found But the Quakers oppose the Christian Doctrine and when pinched think to Blind the Eyes of the World by Pretending that they only spoke against such Opinions as never were held and which their Opposers Detest as much as they can do But if they Differ not from us now in Doctrine as they of Late would have us believe Why then do they seperate from us Why have they Branded all other Communions but themselves as in the Apostacy as Conjures Devils c. Have they never understood our Doctrine till Now Then Now tho' Latâ— let them Return IV. The next Quotation objected by G. Keith is out of a Letter of one Solomon Eccles A Great Preacher and Prophet of the Quakers where he said That the Blood of Christ is no more than the Blood of another Saint Which T. E. excuses thus p. 117. But that Blood which he said was no more than than Blood of another Saint was the Blood that was forced out of Him Christ by the Souldier after He was Dead This is a Plain Confession instead of a Defence But hear the Reason he gives for it He makes a Difference betwixt the Blood which Christ shed before His Breath went out which he calls a Voluntary offering of Christ Himself because He was then Alive and betwixt the Blood shed after He was Dead which he calls The Forcible Act of a Souldier i. e. not Voluntary in Christ and so of no more Vertue than the Blood of another Saint This is Horrible Did not Christ Voluntarily Deliver up His Body to the Death and His Blood to be Spilt yet these Men would render His Death
and the Blood Spilt after it as a Force upon Him and so take away all the Vertue and Efficacy of it and make no more of it than of the Blood of another Saint But Saint John ch xix 34.35 lays much Greater stress upon it And tells this with more Particular Observation than of the shedding of any other Part of His Blood Then it was that the Blood and Water Issued forth out of His side the Two Sacraments of Baptism and His Supper and Two of the Three Great Witnesses upon Earth 1 John v. 8. And this Piercing of Christ's Body after He was Dead is Recorded ver 37. as the Fulfilling of that Famous Prophesie Zech. xii 10. And as the Great Ground and Confirmation of our Faith And he that saw it bare Record and his Record is True And he knoweth that he saith True that ye might Believe Know ye not said St. Paul That so many of us as were Baptized into Jesus Christ were Baptized into His Death Rom vi 3 4. Therefore we are Buried with Him by Baptism into Death But why Buried with Him upon the Quaker Doctrine more than with any other â—â—int For His Burial was not Voluntary He was then Dead And it is no Wonder that they have thrown off the Baptism of His Death who have Renounced the Benefit of His Death it self of His Blood after that shed and of His Burial He was no more to them after He was Dead than any other of their Friends or Saints Can Christian Ears bear this Well then to Mollifie this since Christians do take it so Ill T. E. will let it pass as an Vnjustifiable Expression And says that in his Truth Defended p. 112. he has call'd it so But when was this Book Printed last Year 1695. In Answer to this then objected against them by G. Keith and to stop All Christians from Running upon them as Blasphemers But 2dly How do's T. E. call this an Vnjustifiable Expression in that Book Do's he do it Plainly and Honestly and with any Zeal against so Foul a Contempt cast upon the Death of our Lord No nothing like it Nay he do's not so much as own it to be Vnjustifiable but puts an If to it And therefore says he If Sol. Eccles did let fall any Vnjustifiable Expression concerning that Blood that was forced out of Christ's Body by the Souldier's Spear after He was Dead as that it was no more than the Blood of another Saint How Mr. Ellwood Do you make an If of it It is Easie then to see what you think of it You meant by an Vnjustifiable an Inconvenient Expression and so Vnjustifiable that should lay you open to the Odium of All that own the Name of Christ. You say that G. W. has likewise disclaimed those Words of Sol. Eccles. How is that After such a Manner as you have done by saving as you Repeat his words p. 117. I do not make S. Eccles 's Expressions therein an Article of our Faith This was a Terrible Rebuke They may be True and Laudable too for all this For Many things are so which are no Articles of Faith But Hark you Good T. E. How came you to Falsifie your Friend G. W's Words by Concealing a Material Part of them and Nibbing them out of the middle of one short Sentence For his words are these p. 59. of his Light and Life c. And yet I do not make Sol. Eccles his Expressions therein especially as construed by our Adversaries to be an Article of our Faith Here is a secret Reserve As construed by our Adversaries Then it seems the words are justifiable enough in themselves but how do their Adversaries construe them we have seen what Constructions they can put upon their Adversaries Meanings And here is a Hole for them to creep out at when ever they shall be Taxed by any of their own Party with this their Modest Reproof of Sol. Eccles. G. Keith taxes them very justly for not shewing their Dislike of this Blasphemy of S. Eccles severely and sharply as T. E. mentions it p. 124. and answers That if they were as Hot-headed as G. K. perhaps they might But that Blasphemy is an High Charge and they that understand it aright are not so forward as G. K. it seems would be to Brand Persons with it for every unsound Expression This is wonderful Cautious and Discreet But they had not all this Moderation when they Branded all the Christian World in Heaps as Apostates Conjures Devils See G. Fox's Great Mystery p. 89. 98. 111. 153. 158. 175. 217. 219. 226. 253. 267. and 311. from the Days of the Apostles for those same Doctrines which they now Pretend to hold themselves They Excomâ—â—nicated John Story John Wilkinson and many more with them for not submitting to the Jurisdiction of their Womens Meetings as an Ordinance of Christ which was first Invented by George Fox And they have since Past the same Sentence upon G. Keith for not Retracting what he had wrote against the Corruption of their Doctrineâ— But as to the Broad and Impious Blasphemy of Sol. Eccles That must pass at the most among other Vnsound Expressions And they must not judge so severely and Brand Persons for every Vnsound Expression No not for Every one and it seems this must go for a Peccadillo amongst the Rest There never was surely such a Company of Good-Natur'd Forgiving People They can slip over cover and excuse the Lewdest Blasphemies in a Charitable way Nothing can Provoke them They would not Censure any or Give an Ill Name for the World They can see no Faults in their own Friends G. W. says of this very Passage of Sol. Eccles that it was so Harmless as might have satisfied any Spiritual or Vnbyassed Mind this is in his Light and Life before quoted p. 58. And if so it was Perfectly Innocent and Harmless indeed And must satisfie the Friends that no Reproof was meant against it by G. W. though something so seeming must be said by way of Policy to stop the Clamours of All Christian People It was this which put T. E's Wit upon the stretch and it found out at last that Distinction abovenam'd betwixt the Blood of Christ which was shed upon the Cross before and after He was Dead which helps not their Cause but has made it worse as before is shewn But tho' Sol. Eccles names the Blood shed after He was Dead yet he makes no Distinction betwixt that and what was shed Before which T. E. now Ingeniously puts upon him But meant it in the true Quaker Notion of the outward and Material Blood whether shed Before or After Death in opposition to their Notion of the Inward Blood shed in their Hearts For Sol. Eccles says in the same Letter That none of you Baptists Independents Presbyterians and Pope Vnderstand the Blood of Jesus Christ no more than a Bruit Beast i. e. They All Understood and Contended for the outward Blood But of
Nature and the same Body which He took of the Blessed Virgin in opposition to the Quaker Notion of understanding Christ's Coming only of the Inward and Invisible Appearance or Manifestation of Christ in the Heart And T. E's objecting against this of Christ's coming as the Son of Mary do's further Confirm us that these Quakers do not mean his coming in His true Human and Outward Body T. E. Objects too that these words to save thee are not Repeated in this Second Quotation of G. W's Words Which has been spoke to before and so I dismiss this head as I do likewise a long Contest which lasts as far as p. 177. Concerning some Letrers and other Papers in MS. which G. Keith Produced full of the Heretical Delusions before mentioned And which T. E. Confesses and Denies as if he were Mumbling of Thistles and Interlards with Billings-Gate against G. Keith With which I do not meddle And having Proofs sufficient out of their Printed Books I will not trouble the Reader with Examining of their Manuscripts IV. T. E. Comes to defend himself p. 177. And a Quotation of his own which G. Keith cited Viz. In comparing the Books of Friends to the Books of them called the Greek and Latin Fathers he G K. has not done as a Friend and Brother but as an Enemy in supposing Friends Books to have been Written by no better Guidance nor clearer sight than theirs who Lived and Wrote in those Dark times T. E. is very Angry that the Auditors at Turners-Hall shouted at this Quotation And well they might To see the most Ignorant and Heretical of all the Sects that ever were in Christendom thus to set up themselves above the Primitive Fathers of the Church and to Prefer their own Writings who cou'd not rightly spell their own Mother Tongue Illiteral Mechanicks to the Great Atbanasius Basilius the two Gregories Naziansen and Nysen Cyril Ambrose Epiphanius Chrisostom Hierom Augustin Hilarius c. All of whom T. E. Instances by Name p. 178. As Inferior to the Quakers and ascends Higher to the Second Century and p. 179. Names Cyprian Tertullian and Origen None of these were to be Compar'd with George Fox and his Disciples These were Dark Times to the Year 1650 when the New Light of the Quakers Arose in our Hemesphere When the Church being Pull'd down the Vilest and most Monstrous and Numerous Spawn of Multifarious Sects that ever the Bottomless Pit spew'd forth at once were with a Thousand other Devils let loose amongst us A just Punishment for our Schism and Rebellion And we are yet left to War with the Tayle of this Hydra which is Gathering New Life and if it shou'd for our sins Prevail our Last Sâ—â—â—e wou'd be worst than the First Who can refrain from Indignation To see such a Conceited Senseless most Ignorant and Blasphemous Crew Destitute of Comon Modesty or â—hame wipe their Mouths and Gravely set up themselves above all the Glorious Lights of the Church Confessors and Martyrs ever since the Apostles whom they Damn as Apostates See Snake in the Grass 2. Part Sect iv As their Execrable Father G. Fox said in his Great Mystery p. 89. That the Quakers Have a Spirit given them beyond all the Fore-fathers since the days of the Apostles in the Apostacy T. E. Quotes scraps out of Perkins Jurieu and Dalley to shew Errors in the Fathers who did not pretend to Infallibility Tho these Modern Authors have made much too Bold with them There are Spots in the Sun But this must not Eclipse their Light and Glorious Gifts they had from God whereby they supported His Gospel with Irresistible Learning Piety and Constancy even to the Death God chargeth His Angels with Folly and suffer'd Imperfections in His Apostles Peter Deserved to be Blamed and even Barnabas was carry'd away with his Dissimulation Gal. 2.11.13 There were great Failings in Noah in Lot in Moses in Samson in David in Solomon And the Quakers who while in the sink of Heresy and Corruption â—oast of a Sinless Perfection may set themselves above all these by the same Rule But what is so Extravagant that they dare not that they have not done William Shewen a Great Quaker Writer and Preacher and Highly Extoll'd by them at his solemn Funeral about two years ago in his Treatise concerning Thoughts and Imaginations Printed 1685. p. 25. Sets up a Quaker as Meeker than Moses Stronger than Samson Wiser than Solomon And more Patient than Job Harmless and Innocent as He Christ was If the Reader be Astonished at this he will see more p. 37. Where the Quakers pretend to be come even beyond the Outward Christ or Jesus They can come to God now without Him And worship Him no more Not to Jesus says he on the Margent that you may take the more Notice of it The Son of Abraham David and Mary Saint or Angel but to God the Father all Worship Honour and Glory is to be Given thro' Jesus Christ i. e. Thro' the Inward Christ or Light within But to Worship the outward Jesus the Son of Mary he Ranks with the Worship of Saints and Angels And his Ascension and Sitting at the Right Hand of God W. Shewen will not have it understood of the outward Jesus but onely of this Inward Christ p. 38. Who when he is thus known to perform all these Offices in his People he is then by such known to sit down at the Right Hand of God He is then also known to Surrender up the Kingdom to the Father And in the Margin he puts this Note Viz. This is the Ascending of Christ up where he was before he Descended Turning all this to the Inward Christ or their Light within Perform'd within them where they have an Inward Ascension an Inward Right Hand of God an Inward Kingdom an Inward Delivering of it up c. And denying any thing of this to be Perform'd Outwardly or to belong to the outward Jesus Now T. E. is desired to shew any such Errors as these and the Denyal of these Four great Essentials of Christianity which is Châ—â—ged and Proved against him and his Partners and is the Subject of our present Discourse 1. Faith in Christ as he Outwardly suffer'd at Jerusalem to our Salvation 2. Justification by his Blood outwardly shed 3. The Resurrection of the Dead 4. The Future Judgment He is desir'd to shew any such Errors as these in those Fathers whom he so much despises No. If any had Published such Doctrines as these in those which he calls Dark Times they had been spew'd out of the Church with the utmost Abhorrence Many were cast out for much less Errors than these Nor ought such Errors to be Tolerated in any Christian Nation And it is an horrible Scandal that such shou'd be suffered to pass under the Name of Protestant It is enough to make that Name odious to all other Christians From the Place last Quoted to p. 197. There is nothing
but a wrangling Personal Dispute betwixt T. E. and G. Keith about some Papers Exhibited by the one against the other All which I pass over And come to G. Keiths Appendix to his Narrative which T. E. begins there to Consider SECT V. The several Charges in the Appendix THese are some further Instances upon the Four Heads which are the subject of the Narrative And a few other things which come in by the by and might have been spar'd But that this Reply may be Full I proceed to Examin them 1. A Quotation out of G W. is set down p. 198. Wherein he denies either the Soul or Body of Christ to be Human or that he had an Human Nature and he says that the Blood of God with which he purchased his Church Act. xx 28. Was not the Blood of the Human Nature And where doth the Scripture says he call the Blood of God Humane or Humane Nature To this T. E. Answers That Christ was not of a meer Earthly Extraction That there was more of Divinity even in that Body than in the Bodies of other Men. Which none hardly the Socinians will Deny But T. E's Inference is not Good That because Christ's Body had more Divinity in it than other Mens that therefore it was too Heavenly to he call'd Humane or Earthly For the Hypostatical or Personal Union of his Human with his Divine Nature did not Destroy or Swallow up his Humanity as the Eutychians held But his Human both Soul and Body are still and for ever Truly and Properly Humane else he were not Truly and Properly a Man And the not knowing of this has greatly Milled the Quakers Who if they had given themselves but a little to Humane Learning which they despis'd because they had it not and had known the Ancient Heresies which were Condemned by the Church in several Ages they wou'd not have fallen in with so many of them as they have Ignorantly done T. E. Wou'd not have given such an Answer as he do's here That Christ's making his Soul an offering for Sin was true and so it is says he in a Figurative Manner of Speaking Which was the very Words and Excuse of these Primitive Hereticks who said that Christ's Passion was not Real but onely in Appearance to Mens Eyes And if his Body was but a Vaile or Garment wherein he dwelt as the Quakers and Socinians do make it then indeed his sufferings were no other than Figurative or â—alse and he cou'd no more be said to have been Cruciâ—y'd then a Man would be Crucify'd if his Cloak or Garment was Crucify'd And thus it must be if Christ's Humane Nature was not Hypostatically united to his Divine Nature so as both to make but one Person as Soul and Body is in Man For otherwise the Soul cou'd feel nothing or be said to suffer for whatever was done to the Body And T. E's Argument and G. W's which he Recites is most Ridiculous that Christ's Soul was Immortal and cou'd not be put to Death So is every Mans. And when we Kill a Man no body says that we Kill his Soul But as the Separation of Body and Soul is Death to us So it was and us Really to Christ And not onely In a Figurative maâ—ner of speaking as T. E. with the Ancient Hereticks do's contend II. Page 202. There is a Quotation of G. W's brought wherein he denies That there is continual need of Repentance And T. E. Justifies it by supposing that the Quakers are free from all Sin Else there must be Continual need of Repentance I will not Enter now upon their most Exploded Title to a Sinless Perfection having done it sufficiently elsewhere I onely mention this now to shew their Infallible Hardiness in pretending still to it after it has been Expos'd even to Laughter and as many Failings shewn of these Perfect Sinless Creatures as wou'd make any of the Prophane to appear Ridiculous And this Pretence to a Sinless Perfection is not the least Gross of their Imperfections And shews the Excess of their Spirituall Pride For which they may Read their Sentence 1 John 1.8 If we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the Truth is not in us For as Solomon says Prov. xx 9. Who can say I have made my Heart clean I and Pure from Sin III. The next Quotation is p. 202. Where G. W's Perversion of Isa ix 6. Is set down He turns that most Express Prophesy of Christ Viz. Vnto us a Child is â—orn c. To an Allegorical sense of Christ within and his being Born in our Hearts And says that he was thus Born in Isaiah himself who wrote these Words Who had also been as with Child Says he i. e. Of Christ T. F. In Defence of this says p. 203. That this was meant of Both Viz. Of Christ's Outward and his Inward Birth but this is false for the Prophecy was only of his Outward Birth And if it can be turned to the Inward how shall we thereby convince the Jews as to the Outward Christ This Liberty of Interpretation will confound all the Prophesies of Christ in the Old Testament And it is Remarkable that Isaac Penington a Quaker having wrote a Book Intituled Some Queries and Answers of deep Concernment to the Jews and Design'd purposely for Their Conversion do's not through the whole once Name the outward Christ But bids them onely look to their Light within T. E. Quotes a Book of G. Keith's call'd The Rector Corrected p. 30. In Justification of this Exposition of his of Isa ix 6. To mean both the Outward and the Inward Birth of Christ And tho my business is not here to Vindicate G. Keith yet I had the Curiosity to look into that Book of his and find that this Text was not so much as under Consideration or once Nam'd in that place but he was treating there wholly of another Subject and which is no ways Applicable to this IV. The next Quotation is p. 203. G. W. in his Book call'd The He Goats Horn Broken by way of Wittieism upon John Horn whom he Answers p. 33. 34. Charges this among others as an Error in J. Horn Viz. That when Paul saith Christ was seen of him Last 1 Cor. xv 8. He must needs mean it of his Body seen and seen by Bodily sight Which is contrary says G. W. to Gal. 1.16 To this says T. E. that if G. W. had denied that Christ was Bodily seen of Paul that had not Allegorized a-away Christ's Resurrection And this is all he says to it But if Christ was not Bodily seen of Paul then was Paul a false Witness of Christ For in that Place 1 Cor. xv He Names himself among other Witnesses to Christ's outward Resurrection He was seen says St. Paul v. 5. Of Cephas then of the Twelve After that he was seen of above 500 Brethren at once after that he was seeen of James then of all the Apostles and last of all
the words are obscure Nor do I well understand the meaning of Christ's entring within his own Flesh which is the Vail and then within himself which is the Holy of Holies It seems to bear this meaning that as the High Priest having enter'd through the Vail left it behind him so that Christ hath left his Body behind him having passed through it into the Holy of Holies Which G. Keith says one Robert Young a Preacher among the Quakers in Pensilvania Did assert and brought these very words of W. P. to Confirm it Which T. E. p. 215. Does not deny but says there ought to be some other Voucher besides G. Keith However this Sense of the words is agreeable to the General tendency of that Book which is to Depreciate the Outward in Comparison of the Inward Christ or Light within otherwise there cou'd have been no difference betwixt W. P. and J. Faldo who did not deny either the Divinity of Christ or the Inward Influence of his Blessed Spirit in our Hearts Yet T. E. gives this Excuse for these words of W. P. That they were given as a Reason among others why the Body of Christ which was Nailed to the Cross simply consider'd by it self and Abstractedly from that Divine Life and Power which dwelt in it shou'd not be called the Christ This makes the matter look much worse against W. P. than any thing G. Keith hath said For it is certain that J. Faldo never said any such thing as that the Body of Christ simply consider'd by it self which T. E. has put as here in a different Character to shew that he laid the stress upon that Limitation and Abstractedly from the Divinity of Christ was the Christ No Christian cou'd say or think any such thing And therefore it was against something else which W. P. disputed against something wherein J. Faldo opposed him which was in asserting the outward Body of Christ against the Quakers Notion of turning it all into an Allegory of the Light within And as Robert Young a fellow Preacher of W. P's understood his words above Quoted they were intended that Christ had Passed through or got within the Vail i. e. of his Body and so left it behind him when he wont beyond it into the Holy of Holies If this was not W. P's meaning let him clear himself from this Defence of T. E's which will not admit of any other Construction to be put upon it XII G. Keith Quotes W. P's Truth Exalted Reprinted An. 1671. p. 13 14. But T. E. throws it off p. 216. in this slight fashion That neither deserves nor needs any other Answer here than a bare denyal This made me suspect something and to look into the place where W. P. is describing the Quakers Christ as he calls it which he does at great length several Pages together and from Top to Bottom not one word of the outward Christ but applying the most express Prophesies of him to that Christ or Light within the Heart Vnto us says he p. 13. The most Afflicted Despised and Forsaken by all the Families of the Earth is a Child Born unto us a Son is Given we call him Wonderful Councellor the Mighty God the Everlasting Father c. and p. 14. This is the Second Adam the Quickning Spirit The Law writ in the Heart and Spirit put in the Inward Parts This is the Quakers Christ And p. 15. This Vniversal Light is God 's beloved Son hear ye him XII Page 217. T. E. to save W. P. from having Sworn by saying As sure as the Lord Liveth and yet Condemning that Form As the Lord Iaveth for a direct Oath confesses this Latter to be an Oath but not the Former This is very Nice But if T. E. the Doctor subtilis of the Quakers had not Inform'd our understandings any Dull Reader wou'd have been apt to think that the Former had rather been the Greater Oath as being more Positive but cou'd never have seen how it cou'd have been not onely less but no Oath at all because it is the very words of the Latter and every word of it onely adding as sure as to it But what was the occasion of W. P's using of these words They were the severe Sanction of a Prophecy which in his Book call'd Reason against Railing p. 180. he gave forth against Tho. Hicks a Baptist Preacher his opponent in these words So sure as the Lord Laveth And I testify to thee from God's Living Spirit if thou desist not and come not to deep Repentance the Lord will make thee an Example of his fury and thy Head shall not go down to the Grave in Peace To this says T. E. p. 218. That he Tho. Hicks Desisted is certain and that he did not come to Repentance I suppose G. Keith will not adventure to say This is in Justification of W. P's Prophecy as if it had been thus Fulfilled or solved First By Tho. Hicks's having Desisted i. e. From opposing the Quakers Which T. E. says is Certain Secondly By his Repenting for it which he says onely that he has Heard And W. P's Prophecy being Conditional and these Conditions of it thus Perform'd it saves his Prophecy from being a False one But First as to T. Hicks's DESISTING to oppose the Quakers after this which T. E. will not have us to Doubt because He even He himself says It is certain Whereas the Contrary is most certain And I can give a most certain Demonstration of it For T. Hicks did not Desist but after all this he Printed an Answer to this very Book of W. P's wherein this Prophecy is and at the end of his Post Script he takes notice of this same Prophecy and says That if W. P. were his Judge be believ'd that he wou'd make good his Prophecy and my Head says T. H. Should not have gone to the Grave in Peace This Book of T. Hicks's is Intituled The Quakers Appeal Answered And Printed 1674. Well but T. E. may say that he Desisted when he had Done Most likely i. e. He did not continue Writing to the last moment of his Life But did his Head go down to the Grave in Peace Yes And was he not made an Example of God's Fury Did he dye in Despair At least so as to be an Example Which must be Publick and Notorious to those about him when he Dyed otherwise it was no Example No. There was nothing at all Extraordinary in his Death But to all Appearance he Dyed in Peace and with Comfort And gave not the least Sign of Repentance for the opposition which he had made against the Quakers And here I cannot refrain to say one word to Mr. Penn That he wou'd seriously Reflect upon the Dreadful Blasphemy of giving forth Lies in The Name of the Lord Nay tho any thing of his Prophecy had befallen T. Hicks yet it had been no less Blasphemous and a False Prophecy in W. P. if it was not Positively Reveal'd to him
Arrogate the Name of Christ to themselves As Isaac Pennington says in his Book above quoted p. 27. Doth not the Name Christ belong to the whole Body and and every Member of the Body as well as to the Head Are they not all of 〈◊〉 yea All one in the Anointing Nor is the Apostle ashamed to give them the Name Christ together with him 1 Cor. XII 12. The Body is the same with the Head Thus they Reckon their own Blood to be the Blood of Christ And to be that Blood which Cleanseth from Sin As you may Read in a Book of theirs called The Guilty Clergy-Man Vn-vailed by T. S. Printed 1657. Where p. 17. He tells their Persecutors as he stil'd them That you will by no means be thence Cleansed i. e. from the Guilt of the Quakers Blood Bâ—â— by the same Blood which you so Cruelly shed 4. This was the Reason of their frequent Idolatries to George Fox giving him the Titles and Attributes of God Falling Prostrate before Him and Adoring Him with these Appellations Thou art the Son of the Ever Living God the King of Israel All Nations shall Worship thee c. Which I have not onely from their Books Quoted in The Snake in the Grass but from Eye-Witnesses They said This was not to the outward George Fox But to the Christ or Light within him And no otherwise wou'd they allow to Worship CHRIST while upon the Earth i. e. Not the outward Person of Christ which they make to be nothing but a Vail or Garment And they cannot call the Bodily Garment Christ But to the Christ or Light within Christ They will sometimes allow That Christ had a greater Measure of Christ or The Light than G. Fox And G. Fox than other of the Friends But I cannot see how they can allow this For if none can Partake of an Infallible Spirit without Partaking of the Infallibility of the Spirit which is the Quakers Plea for Infallibility Then must All Partake of it Alike for there are no Degrees in Infallibity And thus every Quaker must be equally Infallible and equally Adorable And I have been told that when some Quakers have been Reprov'd for Boâ—â—ng one to another tho they wou'd not do it to the Men of the World contrary to their Principle of not giving Honour to Man They have Answered That they did not Bow to the Man but to the Light within him which they take to be God Thus Committing Wild Idolatry to one another while they deny Civil Honour to others 5. Isaac Pennington as above Quoted calls the Blood of Christ the Blood of the outward Earthly Nature And George Whitehead in his Light and Life c. oft mentioned before p. 58. In excuse of that Blasphemous saying of Solomon Eccles's That the Blood which was forced out of Christ'â— side by the Spear Was no more than the Blood of another Saint says That â—t was no more Simply as to the Essence of Blood And Argues That Seâ—ing the Children had Flesh and Blood and Christ took Part of the same how was it more or another simply as to the matter of Blood Yet Thomas Ellwood in his present Answer when he wou'd ward off the Consequence of Christ's Body being the same in substance which it was upon Earth and so a true Humane Body still which was urg'd upon G. Whitehead crys out p. 205. As in a surprize But hold a little Did G. Whitehead ever call or own Christ's Body now in Heaven or while it was on Earth to be Terrestrial or of the Earth J. P. calls it the Earthly Nature And G.W. says that it was the same with ours as to the Essence or matter of Blood Yet says T.E. where did G.W. ever call it Terrestrial or of the Earth Thus do these Men turn and wind their Hypothesis at every Pinch They cannot make it hang together The truth is They are Bewildred and know not what they say 6. The Quakers have an outward and an Inward Flesh of Christ The outward they make nothing of no more than of the Flesh of any other Good Man But their Faith is in the Inward Flesh i. e. Their Light within And this onely is it which with them do's take away Sin G. Fox in a Paper which he directs To all People in Christendom concerning Christ's Flesh which was offered c. Printed 1671. p. 55. Sets forth in a Monstrous Jargon for he cou'd Write no otherwise this Inward Flesh of Christ as Crucify'd c. when Adam Fell. And in this Flesh says he is the Belief that takes away the Sin This G. Keith objected And says Thom. Ellwood in his Answer p. 207. That G. Fox there speaks of Christ according to the Flesh Crucify'd And was not this his outward Flesh Says T. E. What! That was Crucify'd when Adam Fellâ— This is too Gross Thomas to put upon us Then he says he has not seen the Book That he remembers and knows not how faithfully G. Keith recites out of it Tho G. K. said that he had the Book and sets down G. Fox's words at Large And p. 51. Of his Narrative Invites all that Pleas'd to see the Books which he had Quoted at his House And if T. E. disdain'd to go or send thither he might no doubt have purchased a sight of that Book many other ways Which I a greater stranger to their Books have done And found the Quotation exact except one Typographical Error Viz. The Life Read which in G. Fox's Book is The Life Read An usual Cant among the Quakers who cry often Read within Read within i. e. Hearken to The Light within And G. Fox in this place to let them know what sort of Flesh of Christ he spoke of And what sort of offering of that Flesh says The Life Read i. e. Read or understand that I mean all I have said of the Life or Light within But take the whole sentence It is p. 50. of Fox Speaking of the offering of Christ when Adam Sinned So through this offering says he is the Reconciliation through the offering of that Flesh that 〈◊〉 Corrupted but takes away Corruptions and his Blood Cleanseth from Corruption The Life Read There is much more there to the same purpose besides what G. K. hath Quoted T. E. next Complains how hard it was for G. Keith to fall thus upon his old Friend G. Fox and tells how good an opinion G. Keith once had of him Well Let that Pass I suppose he has alter'd his opinion as of G. F. So of G. W. T. E. and several others And he has fully satisfy'd the World that he had good Cause so to do And I verily believe that what he did was out of a Principle of Conscience For he has got nothing by his Change but Losses and great Abuse The Quakers Prosecuted him for his Life in Pensilvania And had nor a New Governour Colonel Fletcher come there in time he had in all Probability been Condemn'd the Quakers
do such great Things how much more wou'd a Godly Zeal for Truth and Religion Prevail V. Thomas Ellwood wou'd turn all the Vile Billingsgate-Railing of the Quakers against the Church of England and others into a Pure Godly Zeal But W. Penn has very Justly Corrected any such Defence in his Address to Protestants 1st Edit p. 242. and of the 2d Edit p. 246. Where he speaks like a Christian and a Gentleman thus They that are Angry for God Passionate for Christ that call Names for Religion and fling Stones and Persecute for Faith may tell us they are Christians if they will but no body wou'd know them to be such by their Fruits To be sure they are no Christians of Christ's making G. Keith in his Narrative having quoted this and objected W. Penn's own Practice as very opposite to it of which he gives some Imstances particularly in his Guide mistaken Printed 1668. p. 18. Where he falls upon The Idle Gormandizing Priests of England as he calls our Clergy and says That No sort of People have been so universally through Ages the Bane of Soul and Body of the Vniverse as that Abominable Tribe for whom the Theatre of God's most dreadful Vengeance is Reserved to Act their Eternal tragedy upon And in his Quakerism a New Nick-Name c. p. 165. he calls the Dissenters An Ill-bred Pedantick Crew the Bane of Reason and l'est of the World the Old Incendiaries to mischief and the best to be spar'd of mankind against whom the Boiling Vengeance of an Irritated God is ready to be poured out c. These are Terrible Words and very like being Angry But T. F. says in his Answer p. 219. That these Words did not proceed from Anger or Passion but from a Just and Godly Zeal against Deceivers and Deceit However both the Church of England and Dissenters are much oblig'd to him for his moderate and Charitable Opinion of them And Decently express'd we cannot Deny But which way soever they have deserv'd it from him yet is not this Calling of Names Is not this flinging of Stones with a Vengeance If there be no Anger or Passion in this what Words shall we find out wherein to express Anger or Passion But I understood the Force of Mr. â—â—nn's Reasoning to consist in this That the Calling of Names and 〈◊〉 Indecent manner of Expression was a certain sign that such a Zeal was not 〈◊〉 Christ But if as T. E. excuses it the most Imbitter'd and Violent Expressâ—â—â— can come from a Godly Zeal then is there no meaning at all in what Mr. â—enn has said And we may call Names and sling Stones to the End of the Chapter and still be good Christians of Christ's making But what is Anger in others is Zeal in the Quakers and so there 's an End of the business But if the utmost â—ierceness may be Excus'd upon Pronouncing a Sentence of Damnation as here and sending us together Church of England Dissenters and All into the Bottomless Pit See Snake in the Grass 2 par p. 32. And as such Reprobates we deserve no other Epithets than Thieves Robbers Conjurers Witches Devils Scarlet-Colour'd Beasts Blood-hounds c. Yet can such Senseless and Childish Rattle as Greenâ—headed Trumpeters Gim-cracks Whirligags Moâ—â—-Calss Thread-bare Tatter de Mallums c. Which the Quakers have bestow'd upon their opponents can these too come from a Godly Zealâ— Can their abominable Nasty stuff come from thence too which wou'd make one Sick to Repeat But I must venture the strength of the Readers stomach to give him a little Taste of it lest he shou'd not believe me See a Book Printed by J. Wiggans whom the Quakers had Provoked to Disâ—â—â— with them which having Published they Reply upon him thus This hath caused thee to spue out on a Piece of Paper for the Dogs to â—ick upâ—â—â— And they take so much of thy Filthy spuing that it causeth them to Vomit 〈…〉 Purges upwards and downwards Thou hast need of one to wipe thee Thâ—â— makest a pitiful stink Through thy Vomiting and Purging thou Besmeaâ—s every one that comes nigh thee One may follow thee by the smell Wiâ—t not give one Vomiting Thou stinks all the Countrey â—â—er â—iâ—e a Man with a Sealâ—d Herd and a Horse with a Gall'd Back Making People Vomit and Spâ—â—e And Margaret Fell afterwards Mâ—â—ry'd to G. Fox wrote to him thus Thou hast Committed Sacriledge which will never be forgiven thee Thou art Accursed and no other Portion caâ— thoâ—e have Thou Infidel Child of Darkness The Curse Christ hath Pronounced on thee Thou art the Man Thou Impudent Lyar Night Owl wicked Lyar c. Now the cause of all this Rage was his denying The Light within to be Christ yet he own'd a Light to come from Chriâ—â— into the Hearts 〈◊〉 True Believers This Marg. â—ell after she was Marry'd to G. Fox became the Mother of the Quaker Church She was then Past the Age of Child hearing yet he gave out that she shou'd have an Isaac And she grâ—w Big and Great were the Expectations The time came on All things Provided for the Lying in The Midwife attendâ—â— several weeks in the House But all vanished and câ—me to nâ—thing This Fox said That his Marriage was a Figure of the Church coming out of the Wilderness above the State of the first Adam in his Innocency in the State of the Second Adam that never â—ell I can produce one that saw a Quaker fall down Prostrate at the Feet of this Margaret Fox and say O thou my Heavenly Mother Pray to my Heavenly Father for me I have before Quoted G. Fox where he say That whâ—â—ther speaks a word and not from the â—â—uth of the Lord it is 〈◊〉 â—â—w then by this Rule All the Rancâ—â—ous All the Senseless All the 〈◊〉 â—â—tly Expressions above Quoted were from â—he Mouth of the Lord 〈◊〉 otherwise All those who spoke them were Coâ—â—â—rers Will T. E. 〈…〉 were all Acted in this by a Godly Zeal Otherwise by 〈…〉 sentence they were no Christians of Christ's making How Dreadfully Astonishing is it to see Men father their Rage and Fury their Effeminate senseless Billings-Gate their very Nastiness upon the Holy Spirit of God! But I am glad to leave this subject VI. 1. I am come now to the Last point and that is to see how far the Present Quakers have Censur'd or Forsaken All these things which have been objected and Prov'd against them Were they Convinced of them and onely willing to come off without the shame of a Publick Retractation but wou'd teach sound Doctrine for the Future And Learn some more Decency tho they hate Manners in Expressing of themselves which they have come to more of Late than Formerly and with it have in a great Measure Abstain'd from that Furious Damning of all Christendom in such Dreadful and Boyling Passion as they were wont If they cou'd be Penitents without being Confessors in this Case I shou'd be glad
a Punctilio of Church-Discipline in submitting to the Jurisdictions of the Womens Meetings and other Instances of G. Fox's Authority and their now Ruling Elders But as to matters of Faith they are perfectly one And as to all and every one of the Points which we have discussed For which Reason G. Keith has left Harp-Lane as well as Grace-Church-street And those of Harp-Lane are as violent opposers of him and the Christian Doctrine which he teaches as the Quakers of Grace-Church-street Therefore as to matters of Faith which we are now upon Thom. Curtis and all those of Harp-Lane who joyn with him are as Proper Instances as if they had been all Pick'd out of Grace-Church-street Answ 3. If this be not True let Grace-Church-street Disown Harp-Lane as not holding the same Faith with them or for any thing else but their Breach of Vnion for the causes before told But there is nothing else so much as Pretended betwixt them They differ but as the Dominicans and Franciscans in the Church of Rome all one in the Faith onely some disputes about their Orders VII And this Division of the Quakers concerning their Church Authority tho it be not of so great Consequence as the Fundamentals of Faith which we have debated Yet it Involves them in as great Absurdities and Contradictions as the other Their Original Pretence was the Sufficiency and Independency of the Light within every Particular Person as has been said against all Impositions or Restrictions whatever from any outward Authority Which made W. Pen in his Address to Protestants p. 152. 2d Edit Interpret that Text Math. XVIII 17. Tell it unto the Church to Relate onely to Private Injuries 'twixt Man and Man and not at all to matters of Faith This was when that Text was urg'd against the Quakers in General for their Defection from the Church But in his Book call'd Judas and the Jews which he wrote against the separate Quakers there p. 13. He brings this same Text full against them and Argues from thence That if in Case of Private offences betwixt Brethren the Church is made Absolute Judge from whom there is no Appeal in this World how much more in any the least Case that concerns the Nature Being Faith and Worship of the Church her self T. E. Endeavours to solve this Contradiction p. 218 of his Answer It having been objected by G. Keith in his Narrative He wou'd put it off thus That in Judas and the Jews W. P. onely meant to give the Church Power to Try and Reject Spirits And that in his Address to Protestants he onely deny'd Power to the Church to Define and Impose upon all People under Temporal and Eternal Punishment Articles of Faith c. And this he says is no Contradiction But W. P. in his Judas c. Makes the Church ABSOLVTE JVDGE from whom there is no Appeal in this World of matters of FAITH as well as others And what does this differ from all those Big words which T. E. brings together to Frighten us and Divert the Question For an Absolute Judge from whom there is no Appeal may Define Impose upon all People c. And if his Power reaches to matters of Faith as Mr. Pen says the Power of the Church doeâ— then if matters of Faith do Reach to Temporal and Eternal Punishment the Power of such Absolute Judge must Reach to those Cases Likewise And to make the Church such an Absolute Judge by vertue of that Text Math. XVIII 17. As Mr. Pen in his Judas c. And yet to say as he does in his Address c. That this Text gives no Power at all to the Church in matters of Faith but that it Relates onely to Private Injuries is full as great a Contradiction as before T. E. meddl'd with the Defence of it But having had occasion to consider this Passage of Mr. Penn's more fully in my Discourse Proving the Divine Institution of Water-Baptism Sect. X. Num. V. p. 42. I will Insist no further upon it in this Place And tell the Reader the Good News That I have done Oct. 26. 1696. FINIS