Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ability_n	able_a	act_n	12	3	5.2588	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39305	A further discovery of that spirit of contention & division which hath appeared of late in George Keith, &c. being a reply to two late printed pieces of his, the one entituled A loving epistle, &c. the other, A seasonable information, &c. : wherein his cavils are answered, his falshood is laid open, and the guilt and blame of the breach and separation in America, and the reproach he hath brought upon truth and Friends by his late printed books, are fixed faster on him / written by way of epistle ... by Thomas Ellwood.	Ellwood, Thomas, 1639-1713.	1694 (1694)	Wing E623; ESTC R224514	71,867	130

grants the Meeting had a Course of Removing and that both before and after See now how unfair he was to charge Friends there with assuming a Power to change the Meetings when the Meetings were by his own acknowledgment to be changed in Course And judge whether the Friends removing the Meeting from one House to the other as it used in Course to be either was an Act of Separation in them or could be a just ground to G. K. and his Party to separate from them The other part of his Proof that my saying the Meeting was changed in Course is False and a Fiction is that T. L. put it to the vote by giving a sign whether it should be removed or not But this is so far from being a Proof that it self wants a Proof and may be false and a Fiction for ought appears For he gives it but upon the credit of his own word In my 32 and 33 pages I shewed that not the Friends in removing the Meeting of Course but he and his in keeping a Meeting at the Bank out of Course when the Meeting was in Course removed made and begun the Separation It had concerned him to have Answered this and cleared himself of it and so no doubt he would if he could but he takes no ●…ice of it but slips away to where I mentioned Thomas Wilson's Evidence and charges me with perverting T. W's words This is his Twelfth Charge Now T. W's Evidence was that having asked G. K. What end he thought the Friends had in removing that Meeting G. K. said he believed they did to force h●… to Meet with them This says G. K. proveth th●… they that used that force towards me were guilty of the Separation But how proves he that any did use sorce or intended to use force towards him The Friends did not say so T. Wilson did not say so 'T was only he himself said he believed they did it to force him to Meet with them But his believing so if he did really believe so does not prove it was so But if he did believe so he was as I observed in my former the more to be blamed in urging the removing of that Meeting as an Instance or Proof that the Friends began the Separation For to separate themselves from him and to force him to Meet with them are contrary enough But where 's his Proof that I have perverted Tho. Wilson's Words which he himself takes as I laid them down without contradicting them yea and argues from them though perversly and falsely His Thirteenth Charge he calls My Perversion in Charging him for having a Private Family Meeting at his House c. Upon this he runs out as far as to the Act of Parliament that allows five besides the Family to meet And infers that by my Sentiment Men must not instruct their Families nor pray in their Families without authority and appointment of the Mens Meeting or if they do they must let none other be present All this is but empty noise raised artificially to amuse his Reader He gave the occasion for my taking notice of his Family Meeting by ●…ing proposed the quite laying aside the After●…s Meeting that Friends had allways held and setting up private Family Meetings in the room of it And because that Proposition did not take the Friends would not loose their Meeting so he thereupon when the Meeting was removed from the Bank to the Centre set up an Evening Meeting in his Family which being done in a Spirit of contention opposition and division was the same in nature and ground with his other open separate Meetings This he seemed to be sensible of himself and therefore to obviate the Objection that he saw might be made he said in his Reasons of the Separation p. 15. That could be counted no Separate Meeting for that day This led me to say As he gives no Account by whose appointment or what Authority that Meeting was held So he offers no reason why it could not be accounted a Separate Meeting nor do I think indeed that he can give any For though M●…n may instruct their Families and pray in their Families being rightly moved thereunto yet a private Meeting in a Family set up in Opposition to publick Meetings and in Disunion to Friends is as really a Separate Meeting as the openly Separate Meetings are He says My Clamour about their Meeting at the Barbadoes House is idle and impertinent So he is willing to turn off any thing that he cannot answer But it 's so pertinent that it fastens the Separation upon him and his Party so close that he cannot shake it off He says We met not there till they had separated themselves from us and denied the Monthly Meeting This is but a b●…gging of the Question in both parts of it which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were not hard beset such a Man a●… he would not have done That the Friends in removing the Meeting from the Bank to the Centre did separate themselves from him and his Party is denied That the Meeting which the Friends denied and whose Acts the Quarterly Meeting refused to Record was a rightly constituted Monthly Meeting is denied These are main Points which he ought to have proved But not being able to do that he begs them too meanly for him But what can a Man do though his Abilities be great when his Cause is not good He adds Besides that they not only threatned to keep 〈◊〉 out at the Bank Meeting but most rudely abused us when we met in it always interrupting any of us that spoke though we never interrupted them I perceive by this he cannot say they were kept out at the Bank Meeting The highest he goes is that they were threatned to be kept out and for the Truth of that we have but his word But it is a known Truth which I suppose himself is not ignorant of that Friends in England have been actually kept out of their Meeting-houses by those Separatists whom he is now fallen in with As for what he says of being rudely abused they must be rudely abusive indeed that could exceed him that way He adds And at last sending some by their Magistratical Authority with Saws and Axes to knock down our Gallery 〈◊〉 they were prevented by some that knocked down both the one and the other which says he I had to hand in directly nor indirectly could he not have said but only looked on and laughed for Ioy Here he mentions Our Gallery so that it seems while he met in the same Room with Friends he had a sort of separate Meeting even there and a separate Gallery for himself and some of his Party in opposition to the Gallery the Ministring Friends used to sit in He should have done well to have told how that Gallery of his came to be set up and when This brings to mind something I have read at the Yearly Meeting concerning this Gallery-work and to the best of my remembrance

else in his Book that I can find He says He shews in that Nin●…nth page that the Monthly Meeting that gave ●…gment against W. S. and T. F. was the Twenty Seventh of the Twelfth Month. 1691. And in that he ●…ys true He adds And it plainly appears from my Book that the Monthly Meeting in the First Month last there mentioned was in the next Month following in the Year 1692. And in that he says False no such thing appearing plainly or at all Now he refers from p. 19. to p. 27. where he says that very Year is mentioned And so indeed it is but not as relating to the Meeting in the First Month last but as the ●…are of a Letter Written the 15th of the Third Month 1692. without any mention of the Meeting in the First Month last That First Month last must be the First Month next before the Book in which it is mentioned was Printed For the date of the Book therefore I searched both in the Title page and at the End But it doth not appear by the Book it self either in what Year at what Place or by whom it was Printed I gave but a transient hint before of his obscure way of Writing not intending to insist on it But since he takes that light Correction so impatiently it 's fit I think he should have more since more is due to him Therefore I now add That his Book called The Plea of the 〈◊〉 c. His Book called Truth and Innocency defended c. His Book called A Testim●… against that false and absur'd Opinion c. His loving Epistle as it came out at 〈◊〉 distinct from his Seasonable Information to which it is now stitched none of these have the Year when the Place where or the name of the Printer by whom they w●…re Printed as other Mens Books usually have By this it appears that it was not without 〈◊〉 I gave him that gentle R●… before which he had better have ●…orn than have given O●… 〈◊〉 ●…ser R●… to follow but that he had no ca●… to charge me with dealing f●…lsly by him in it Why he should choose for in so many Instances it look●… more like Choice than Chance to conceal the dates of his Book●… I cannot tell 〈◊〉 it were that from the Incertainty that arises from such an obscure way of Writing he might ha●…ly catch his Answerer upon some mist●… in point of time as he did me about the Yearly Meeting and thence both take the adva●… to insult over him and withal avoid his Argument In his Tenth C●…ge He Vaunts himself over my Ignorance saying I most ●…ersly and Ignorantly alledge by a sort of Argument that is so silly and weak that scarce an Ordinary School-Boy wo●…d use it suppose him to mean One of his own instructing That if that Act of T. L's viz. says G. K. his withdrawing from the Monthly Meeting adjourned where I begin it But say I his withdrawing from the Monthly Meeting before that adj●…rnment where G. K. did formerly begin it was the Cause of the Sep●…ration ●…en it would not be the Separation it self But the Separation must come after this ●…s this Effect follows ●…he ●…use This that the Effect follows the Cause he 〈◊〉 ridiculously weak And thereupon reminds me of the advice he gave me in the Yearly Meeting to beware of falling into the 〈◊〉 of ●…hat called Philosophy If that called Philosophy be a Ditch I confess I have no mind to fall into it For if it be a Ditch I doubt 't is a 〈◊〉 one because he who has walked so long in si●… drops so much Di●… from his Pen. And si●… F●…●…st vel 〈◊〉 hoste doc●…ri it is L●…ful 〈◊〉 l●…rn even of an Enemy I am content to learn by another's harm to beware and not venture too far into his Ditch left he bring an Action of Intrusion against me for ent●…ing against his mind upon his Possession the Ditch of that called Philosophy Yet let him give me leave to put him in mind for I doubt not but he knows it already that Omnis Caus●… est prior suo effect●… every Cause is before it's Effect and Effectus non est Causa the Effect is not the Cause are true Rules in that Philosophy which is not a Ditch But Friends whatever his Logicians or School-men as he says teach who are not always in the right as he is often in the wrong when I argued that if that Act of T. Lloyd's going out of the Monthly Meeting and taking away a Wing or Skirt of the Meeting with him which G. K. said he did was the Cause of the Separation then it could not be the Separation it self But the Separation must come after this as the Effect follows the Cause I suppose I spake to your Understanding and that ye will not be easily per●…ded by his Logicians or Schoolmen or himself either to put the Cart before the House or the Effect before 〈◊〉 Cause But however Ignorant I was what Forgery Perversion or false Accusation was there in this His Eleventh Charge is That I falsly alledge that the Change of the Meeting in Philadelphia from the Bank to the Cent●… was in Course This says he I prove to be false and a Fiction because at the time of the Course of 〈◊〉 was not yet 〈◊〉 nor did come either so soon before or after so T●…l put it to a vote by giving a sign whether it should he ●…ved or not c. This Proof of his consists in two things First That the ti●…●…f the Course of it that is of its being removed in Course was not yet come This Objection I remember he made in the Yearly Meeting at London and it was there Answered and I took notice of both the Objection and Answer in my former Epistle p. 31. thus I remember indeed which I would here note G. K. did object That the Meeting was removed that Year somewhat earlier than it had been some other Year's But to that it was replied by the Friends of Pensilvania then present that there was no certain day prefix'd and settled for the removing thereof but it was either earlier or later in the Year according as the Seasons of the Year proved fair or foul for weather This plain and full Answer to his Objection G. K. takes no notice of but urges afresh that the time of the Course of changing the Meeting was not yet come as a Proof that my saying it was changed in Course is False and a Fiction But this stands still in his way and he must remove this before he can get forward He must prove that there was a prefixt day for the removing of the Meeting and that Friends removed it before that fixt day was come e're his Proof will stand him in any stead However Friends I hope ye will take notice that by his saying The time of the Course of it was not yet come nor did come either so soon before or after he