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
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
Men that are known in our Parts of the World if any where at all either of the Present or Past Ages yet it is an Easie and a Common thing for Men to follow their own Jmaginations and Supiness Ignorance and Conceitedness do naturally Produce it so that to apply T. E's own Distinction To Believe even Historically Christ's Coming in the Flesh and the Ttue Ends and Design of it is Harder than to Experience my Minds running without Care or Pains after my own Fansie which Men do to avoid Labour and the difficulty of Examining and Comparing For the Workings of Reasâ—n are full of Labour not so of the Imagination which is strongest in Mad Men and those most Destitute of Reason And the Sobriety of Religion is with much more Pains acquir'd than the Levity of Imagination which has no Stint or Rule but Runs away with those who have not the Curb of Reason to govern it as a wild Horse when the Bridle is broke And therefore the Beâ—ieving of the One which T. E. speaks of i. e. the Historical Faith of Christ's Incarnation c. and the True Ends of it is more Difficult than the Experiencing of the other i. e. the workings of what they call their Light within as much morâ— Difficult as Knowledge is more Difficult than Ignorance and Reason than Imagination And they are Novices know least of Religion who are soonest lifted up with Pride and these fall into the Condemnation of the Devil 1 Tim. iii. 6. who Transforms himself into an Angel of Light as often as hâ— can Perswade any to put Darkness for Light and Light for Darkness XIII W. Penn contends earnestly that the Seed of the Woman Promised Gen. iii. 15. was not that Jesus who was Born of the Blessed Virgin or any other Person but only a Principle or Seed in every Man's Heart The Seed says he as quoted by T. E. p. 91. cannot be that Body i. e. of Christ and consequently the Seed of the Promise is an Holy and Spiritual Principle of Light c. received into the Heart And this Light within he makes to be Christ. Now see how T. E. endeavours to Rescue him He says p. 90. concerning Christ's Body That that Body simply Consider'd as a Natural Body which says he was the Notion the Adversaries had of it was not properly the Christ But there were no such Adversaries no not one that oppos'd W. P. who said that the Body of Christ simply considered as a Natural Body was Properly the Christ No Man in this World ever said so Therefore W. P. is no ways Justified but rather Exposed by this and the Quaker Principles laid more open XIV One or W. P's Arguments by which he Endeavours to Prove that the outward Christ was not the Promis'd Seed is because as he says One outward thing cannot be the Proper Figure or Representation of another And the Passover being a Type of Christ he thence Infers That the outward Lamb shews forth the Inward Lamb i.e. the Light within This is set down p. 90. of T. E. among other such like Arguments of W. P. and T. E. answers p. 92. W. P. did not say the Paschal Lamb was no Figure of Christ without Did he not What then becomes of W. P's Argument That one outward thing cannot be the Figure of another CANNOT it is Impossible i. e. The Paschal Lamb not only was not but Could not be the Figure of Christ But as T. E. has put it Christ may still be the Promised Seed even the outward Christ which W. P. said Could not be T. E. Pleads again p. 96. and catches hold of the Word Proper in W. P. and seeks to Draw him out of the Mire by that Twig viz. That one outward thing cannot Properly be the Figure or Representation of another And so he makes the Paschal Lamb to be Properly a Figure of the Inward Lamb i. e. The Light within But Improperly a Figure of the outward Christ This is hard Fishing and renders their Heresie yet more Broad-Fac'd The Paschal Lamb was many ways a Type of the outward Christ and of His Sufferings outwardly in the Flesh It Sacrific'd so He â—â— Bone of it Broken so none of His The Door-Posts sprinkled with its Blood so our Consciences by His Bloâ—d It Sav'd from the destroying Angel so His Blood from Sin and Death It without Blemish He without Sin It with Bitter Herbs He with Bitter Dolours upon the Cross And several other Parallels which are betwixt them Which all were proper and fit Types of Him Otherwise T.E. arraigns the Wisdom of God for making Improper Types But these Types can no ways but by a Mad Imagination be apply'd to the Light within which in the Quaker Sense sheds its Blood WITHIN and its Bones are not Broken WITHIN c. And of this the Paschal Lamb was a Proper Type But an Improper Type of Christ without It could not be Apply'd to Him but by Long and Strange Fetches Bâ—t of the Sufferings Blood and Bones of the Light within you see how Naturally and Most Properly They are all Typify'd And doth it not so says T. E. p. 92. i. e. The outward Lamb shew forth the Inward Lamb. Just as you have seen and as T. E. stumbles upon it p. 93. where he forgets himself for Great Wits have Short Memories and owns quite contrary to what I have quoted That it was the outward Body or Manhood only of Christ our Spiritual Passover that in a strict and proper Sense was said to be slain Now we are come quite about again Now the outward Lamb shews forth the Inward Lamb neither Strictly nor Properly But the outward Body of Christ and that Only And now T. E. has left W. P. where he found him To say what he can for one outward thing not being the Type of another That the outward Lamb shews forth the Inward Lamb c. XV. T. E. shews us how hard it is to find out a Quaker by Words what Double Meanings and Secret Reserves they have in every thing that they say and that they can say when Pinch'd any Words that can be Required of them without Danger of being Discover'd When they acknowledge Christ to be Man do they mean the same thing as we do No far from it They have a Spiritual Manhood that means quite another thing And in this Sense T. E. acknowledges p. 97. That Christ was truly a MAN befâ—re he appear'd in the outward Body which was Nail'd to the Cross and that not only In his People but out of or without them also How long before Even From the Beginning And if he was Truly Man then says he to be sure He is not less truly Man now Yes to be sure and they think Him to be as Little Man NOW as He was Then But they are Desir'd if they would be so Good to let us know How Christ became the Son of Man how He took upon Him our Flesh how
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
Banter And why say they must the Felicity of the Soul Depend upon the Body I suppose they mean but in Part as a Widower may have some Happiness tho Great Grief with it But why not upon that Body it had before as well as upon a New Body For let me ask these Quakers who say that the Soul will have a Body in Heaven tho' not the same body it had before will that New Body be any Addition of Happiness or Advantage to the Soul If not To what Purpose is it But if so then is the Soul in an Imperfect State before it gets that Body and all the Quaker Objections Return upon themselves Let them then speak out and own the True Quaker Opinion viZ. That the Soul do's Receive that Heavenly Body Immediately after Death Nay I have heard some say That they had it already and all the Resurrection that ever they expect Indeed they know not what they mean by it and that Heavenly Body which they talk of most of them understand nothing by it but the Soul it self or an Heavenly Frame or Disposition of the Soul which they think they have attain'd already or may be some of them may think they may have it in an Higher Measure after their Death And this is all the Resurrection and all the Heavenly Body that they Mean when they use these Words II. T. E. p. 153. brings in the subject of their Infallibility and stands stoutly by it G. Keith had objected against this out of a Book of G. W's call'd The Voice of Wisdom before mentioned where G. W. Boldly avers p. 33. That they that want Infalâ—ibility they are out of the Truth and their Ministry is not of the Spirit seeing they speak not from the Spirit but from their own Hearts which are Deceitful where they want Infallibility And their Common Salvo to those they would Impose upon That they only Plead for the Infallibility of the Spirit i. e. of God which none ever Deny'd will not do in this Place For p. 32. Danson whom G. W. opposes had put his Objection so Clear as to obviat that Distinction His words are these As for your Participation of the Infallible Spirit if that were granted that Infers not a Participation of the Spirit 's Infallibility As indeed it do's not more than of its Omnipotence Omniscience or any other of the Divine Attributes But G. W. do's violently oppose this and says most ignorantly that This tends to Divide the Spirit from its Infallibility as if such as Partake of the Spirit do not Partake of its Infallibility was there ever such Folly as this Truly I think not nor such Mad Enthusiastical Delusion ever heard of before in the World For they may Pretend to Partake of God's Omnipotence by the same Reason and with as much Justice Was W. P. Infallible in not only saying but Printing it That Christ was born at Nazareth Or if there was an Error in the Press and Nazareth put for Bethlehem from the Likeness of the Words was T. E. Infallible in Printing this over again as before is told without Correcting of it Were these Quakers Infallibly Guided into the Meaning of that Scripture Matth. xi 30. My Yoke is easie and my Burden is Light who quoted it at a Conference before those whom I know as a Proof for their Light within A little Human Learning would have done well here to have understood the Meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this Text which signifies Light not as oppos'd to Darkness but to Weight of a Burden which common sense much less Infallibility could not have mistaken in this Text. Was William Walker a Great Quaker Preacher Infallible who mistook John xiv 2. In my Father's House are many Mansions for In my Father's House are many Manchets And made the Application what Plenty of Provision was in Heaven fine White Bread little Manchets and Many of them This I have from those who heard him and heard other Quakers Improving upon his Doctrine what Fine Bread there was in God's House In-numerable Instances of the Like Ignorance might be Given and of Lying Prophesies the Rankest Treasons and Blasphemies Pronounced In The Name of the Lord for which I Refer the Reader to The Snake in the Grass where he will find a Plentiful Collection of them and Un-denyably Vouched Now George Fox their First and Great Apostle in his Answer to the Westmorland Petition 1653. p. 5. says All you that Speak and not from the Mouth of the Lord are False Prophets And in his Saul's Errand c. 1654. p. 7. says They are Conjurers and Diviners and their Preaching is from Conjuration that is not spoken from the Mouth of the Lord. If G. Fox told a Lye in this then by his own Rule he was a Conjurer because he spoke not from The Mouth of The Lord. And if he spoke Truth He is as much a Conjurer and all the Quaker Preachers with him who either Preached False Doctrine or Mis-understood or Mis-apply'd any Text of Scripture or any other Man's Meaning of which we have pretty Broad Instances now before us because No Mistake of any sort can come from The Mouth of The Lord. SECT 4. of Christ's Coming to Judge the Quick and the Dead I. GEorge Whitead says as quoted p. 160. Now what is that Glory of the Father in which His Christ's coming is Is it visible to the Carnal Eye And when was that coming to be Is it now to be looked for outwardly But further we do acknowledge the several Comings of Christ according to the Scriptures both that in the Flesh and that in the Spirit which is Manifest in several Degrees as there is a Growing from Glory to Glory But Three Comings of Christ not only that in the Flesh at Jerusalem and that in the Spirit but also another Coming in the Flesh yet to be Expected we do not Read of but a Second Coming without Sin unto Salvation which in the Apostles days was looked for The First Coming of Christ he confesses to be that in the Flesh at Jerusalem The Second be makes to be His Inward Coming into our Hearts which he says was looked for in the days of the Apostles i. e. Christ was so â—ome at that time in their Hearts But the Coming to the Future Judgment he calls the Third Coming and this be Utterly Denys And T. E. Endeavours to support him by Matth. xvi 28. where Christ said That some standing there should not tast of Death till they saw the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom i. e. till the Destruction of Jerusalem which was a Glorious Manifestation of the Power of Christ in Fulfilling those Judgments which he had Threatned upon the Jews And it was likewise a Type of the Final Judgment and Destruction of the World But T. E. knowing nothing of this would understand those Scriptures which speak of Ghrist's coming to Judgment to mean only His Inward Coming in the Heart
he was seen of me also Now if he was not seen of Paul then was he seen of none of the Rest And so they are all together False-Witnesses As St. Paul makes the Inference v. 15. Yea and We are found False-Witnesses of God because we have Testified of God that he Raised up Christ Whom he Raised not up if so be that the Dead Rise not But T. E. says quite contrary to this Reasoning of St. Paul That tho we shou'd deny that Christ was Bodily seen of Paul yet this wou'd not Allegorize away Christ's Resurrection St. Paul thought that it wou'd totally overthrow it and all our Faith with it And moreover That to deny the Resurrection of one Bodys do's Infer the Denyal of Christ's Resurrection As he Argues ver 12 c. Now if Christ he Preached that he Rose from the Dead 〈◊〉 say some among you that there is no Resurrection of the Dead But now if tâ—ere be no Resurrection of the Dead then is Christ not Risen And if Christ be not Risen then is our Preaching vain and your Faith is also vain You see how these Articles of our Creed the Resurrection of Christ and our Resurrection are linked so closely together that they do mutually suppose one another and taking away of the one do's destroy the other Therefore I do Earnestly Recommend it to the Quakers to Consider from whence they are Fallen how their Error as to our Resurrection has taken away likewise the Resurrection of Christ And the denyal of his outward Resurrection is Rendring our Faith vain and overturning the whole Foundations of Christianity Of which this of the outward Resurrection of Christ was the main Pillar And therefore in the Choice of one to succeed Judas it is said Act. 1.21 That he must be chosen out of those who had been Eye-Witnesses of Christ all along that he might be a Witness with us said the Apostles of Christ's Resurrestion This was the Hinge and very Basis of the Christian Faith Which the Quaker New Light has wholly overturn'd V. Page 204. The Perversion of that Text Isa LIII 9. Is instanc'd He made his Grave with the wicked which R. Hubberthorn of the First Rank of Worthies among the Quakers to favour their Notion of the Inward Christ or Light within Suffering Dying and Rising again in the Heart Corrupts thus He made his Grave in the wicked To this says T. E. First That R. Hubberthorn did not mention Isa LIII As if a Man might not Repeat a Text and that it were not usual without Quoting Chapter and Verse Secondly He says that R. H. was not there treating Of the General Resurrection or the Resurrection of the Body His words are Christ the Seed made his Grave in the wicked and in the Rich in his Death and out of that Grave shall rise with his Body into Everlasting Life And adds If thou canst Receive it thou mayest be satisfied Right If thou canst Receive it There you are pretty secure For who can Receive such Unintelligible Jargon T. E. is desir'd to tell us what they mean by the Christ or Light within Rising out of the Wicked into Everlasting Life But to his Answer He says this was not spoken of the Resurrection whereas it is Plain that it was spoken of the Resurrection and of nothing else Unless he will say that by Rising out of the Grave they do not mean a Resurrection and so give us a New Language and have secret meanings of their own for words that no body may understand them Which I am afraid is the Case VI. Here follows a War about Contradictions in G. W. with which I will not meddle thinking it not worth a Victory to find Contradictions in him But I will onely mark where he discovers his Principles as to Religion As at the end of p. 205 and beginning of p. 206. Did G. W. says T. E ever call or own Christs Body now in Heaven or while it was on Earth to be Terrestrial or of the Earth Then it was not a true Human Body while on Earth or now in Heaven And Christ was not then nor is now Truly and Really a Man But of this enough before VII Page 207. T. E. makes a nice Distinction betwixt Summoning God as a Witness as he words it and declaring such a thing as truth In the Presence of God He says one is an Imprecation especially the words So help me God but that the other is not But when I declare a thing as In the Presence of God is there not an Imprecation Imply'd if I speak False But this touches a sore place of the Quakers For there was nothing wherein they were more Positive than of the Unlawfulness of Attesting God in whatsoever Form in any Worldly business or going beyond plain Yea or Nay And that every such Attestation was by them counted an Oath and utterly Forbidden under the Gospel What! say they in a Treatise of Oaths Presented to King and Parliament 1675. Signed by William Pen George Whitehead and 11 more p. 17. make God the great God of Heaven and Earth our Caution in worldly Controversies as if we â—rou'd bind him to obtain our own Ends It is to make too Bold with him c. And p. 74 putting the Question What shall we say is beyond Yea and Nay Ans Without doubt an Oath And in their Book call'd A Positive Testimony against all Swearing under the Gospâ—â— Printed 1692. p. 23. The Appealing after any manner to God as a Judge or any ways using his sacred Name or Mentioning any thing whereby it may be Imply'd â—s by Heaven Earth c. When Relating onely to Human Worldly and Inferior matters may be Granted to be an OATH And p. 31. How can any Invoke God for a Witness or any other Purpose or any ways Imploy or use his sacred Name for a security in Earthly matters if it was not a PROPER OATH And p. 39. From hence it may be seen an Invincible Reason against Swearing and the Naming or using God's sacred Name any ways to Confirm the Truth of my Speech Relating to Human and Worldly matters And p. 46 47. With what Face or Pretence can any that sincerely Profess Christianity take any Oath or use any Higher Expressions for Confirming Human and Temporal maâ—ters than Christ's Evangelical sentence of Yea Yea and Nay Nay or what is Equivalent thereto And what Christian Men or Magistrates or Powers of the Earth can Lawfully Prescribe or Require more than Christ hath Permitted herein Yet all this Notwithstanding they have the very last Session of Parliament not onely submitted but Imploy'd their Interest to obtain and when opposition was made struggled hard and at last Prevail'd for an Act of Parliament that they shou'd be admitted to use in Temporal Courts and for Worldly matters this Form of giving their Evidence In the Presence of the Almighty God the Witness of the Truth of what I say For they found themselves Pinch'd in their
by God in some Extraordinary manner and in some other way than the strong Impulse of his own Imagination But he was carry'd into this by the Common Track of the Quakers whose constant custom it was and seen in all their Writings to Publish all their Conceits as the Immediate word of the Ever-Living God And as W. P. here to Pawn the very Being of God for the Truth of their Delusions That As sure as the Lord Liveth what they deliver'd shou'd so come to pass And tho such of their Predictions have 1000 times been Defeated and Prov'd False yet this is no Mortification to them But they Persist still in the assurance of their own Infallibility Can such an Instance of strong Delusion be given ever since the World began Pray God to open their Eyes that they may at last Consider of it as they ought And recover themselves out of this Snare of the Devil wherein they are taken Captive by him at his will XIV Page 218. 219. Some Contradictions of W. P. are Disputed which I pass by in this place because their Doctrines is the subject which I now Pursue And wou'd not Interrupt. What follows of T. E's Answer is in Vindication of himself from Charges laid against him by G. Keith Which are for the most part upon the same Heads which have been already Consider'd And his Defence of himself is after the same fashion as he has defended W. P. and G. W. by always Perverting the Question and Imposing False Positions upon his opponents that he may seem to Confute them and hide his own Principles the while Of which method having seen so much before I will to save Repetition but offer you a Taste here to verify the Character I have given of him And to ease the Reader who if he be not already Tyred I am sure I am therefore I shall beg leave to Contract XV. Page 220. 221. The Charge against T. E. is That he deny'd the Blood of Christ which was shed after his Death by the Spear to be any Part of the Sacrifice from this Reason because he said upon the Cross Consummatum est It is finished Whence G. Keith Infer'd That Christ's Death must be excluded by the same Rule because that was after he had said It is Finished No says T. E. That cannot be charg'd upon me because I said that Christ had pronounced It is finished had Bow'd his Head and given up the Ghost before his side was Pierced by the Spear This was onely too free himself from the Consequence of Excluding Christ's Death from being a Part of the Sacrifice which it does not For if It is Finished was meant of the whole Sacrifice then it was Finished before his Death But however T. E. says nothing in Excuse of his Excluding the Blood shed after his Death Therefore that stands still Excluded by him without any Defence And this does exclude the Whole and Intire Sacrifice to which Christ's last Words It is finished are not Extended but only to All that he was to do and suffer before his Death For as the Bodies of the Legal Sacrifices were Burned that is sacrificed and their Blood offered After the Death of the Beasts which were Sacrificed so was it in Christ whom they Frae-figured his Body pierced and his Blood shed after his Death were Truly and Properly a Part of the Sacrifice as much as what he suffered before he Expired And as the Legal Sacrifice was not compleated by the Death of the Beast but by the Burning of it and offering of the Blood afterwards shed And those who Reject That Blood do mutilate his Sacrifice and render it ineffectual to themselves XVI Page 223. T. P. is charg'd with these Words I deny that Christ came by Generation of and from the Properties of Man in Mary This takes away the Hunane Nature of Christ T. E. says p. 225. he meant this only as to Christ's Divine Nature Which is Non-sense And none ever said That his Divinity was Generated of the Properties of Man in Mary XVII G. Keith brought a Quotation out of T. E's Truth defended p. 138. wherein he said That Jesus the Saviour was not Created T. E Answers here p. 226. That this Arose from hence that he G. K. wou'd make the Manhood onely to be Christ without the Godhead Which G. K. was far from saying Nay but the page before Viz. p. 225. T. E. owns that G. K. â—ad Confessed not to the Manhood onely but the Godhead and Manhood Vnited Therefore it is plain that T. E. meant to exclude the outward or Created Christ And places all upon the Inward Christ or Light within which he says was not Created i. e. upon Christ as God onely but not Man XVIII This will appear further in what follows T. E. said in the same Book That Christ is the Great Cause of Regeneration and Sanctification Chiefly as he is Manifested Inwardly in the Heart This is to Prefer his Inward to his outward Appearance and to his outward Birth Death c. And This is as Absurd says G. Keith As to say the Beams of the Sun that Descend on the Earth are the Chief Cause of the Earths Fruitfulness and not the Sun it self that is in the Firmament T. E. Answers p. 229. As if Christ says he were no otherwise in the Saints than the Sun is on the Earth Viz. by its Beams This shews us the Heart of the Quakers who aâ—â— not satisfied with the Influences and Inspiration of Christ But will have the very Person of Christ within them And acknowledge no other Christ now in being It is the True and Real Heat and Light of the Sun which is convey'd to us in its Beams And it is the True and Real Virtue and Light of Christ which from him in Heaven is convey'd into our Hearts And what more wou'd the Quakers have Nothing less than the very Body and Person of Christ within them This is the Foundation of all the Quakers Errors Whereby they pass over the outward Birth and Sufferings of Christ as so many Facile Representations and Historical Transactions But place all the Merit and Salvation in their own Light within which they think to be the onely True Real Substantia and Personal Christ and that there is none other XIX What follows in the 3 next pages which are the last of T. E's Answer is nothing but some Personal Reflections and Vapourings wherein none but themselves are Concern'd Therefore I leave them Having omitted nothing I think that is Material in T. E's Answer which Concerns the Principles of the Christian Religion which onely are my Concern in this matter otherwise I had neither put the Reader nor my self to any Part of this Trouble Pray God it may Answer the End for which it was Intended that is to Perswade those who wield their Pens amongst the Quakers to Contend no longeâ— for vain Victory or to Buoy up their own Reputations That they wou'd not mis-spend their
Leven In their Publick Schools it is Enjoyn'd that the Scholars shou'd Read such a Portion of that Blasphemous Journal of G. Fox's every day Particularly in their great School at Wansworth The Publick ought to take some care of this in Pity to their Poor Souls And in Private Families that odious Journal is daily Read where the Holy Bible is suffer'd to Mould And the Travels of Fox are more Read and Valu'd by the Quakers than those of St. Paul or any of the Acts of the Apostles 4. But to shew how their Infection does spread if what I have said be not enough I will give this further Demonstrative Proof which has occur'd very lately There is one Thomas Curtis commonly call'd Captain Curtis he was such in Oliver's Army at Reading a wealthy Man and one of the Quakers of the most Ancient standing now among them he has â—een a Preacher with them about 40 years and so still continues Has suffer'd and merited in their cause as much as any But is more open-hearted and less Dissembling than the Rest He freely owns the Doctrines he has Learn'd and which he always taught since he first engag'd amongst the Quakers and carry'd it on with Indesatigable Zeal He erected or was chiefly Instrumental in it a Monthly Quaker Meeting at Kings-Heath in Lamborne Woodlands in Berkshire 25 Miles from Reading it was call'd Thom. Curtis's Meeting And Preaching there at their Monthly Meeting upon Sunday the 4th of this Oct. 1696. He took notice of their Present Divisions upon Account of the New Doctrine as they call it which G. Keith had of Late Broached among them And finding that some of that Meeting had a favourable opinion of G. Keith herein and embraced his Principles parcicularly one William Clark he challenged him by Name and any 5000 of that Party to dispute with him Whereupon Will. Clark did engage him And there Publickly before them all T. Curtis asserted That Christ had a Prepared Body but what is become of it he knew not neither said he do I care Being ask'd whether Christ had a Soul He said he knew not Whether it was the Godhead or Manhood that suffered He Answered that he cou'd not tell whether it was the Manhood or the Godhead that suffered He said There was no Resurrection but of the Soul from the Death of Sin and this said he I have often Preached and do still maintain it He said That Paul got all the Resurrection while living in this World That he did believe his own Body shou'd be changed like unto Christ's Glorious Body while he was living in this World That he knew nothing of Christ but within himself Being asked by W. Clarke whether he did believe that Christ is in Heaven without us in the Entire nature of Man of Soul and Body the some for substance it was on Earth Glorify'd at God's Right Hand He Repâ—y'd This is one of thy Quibbles I will not Answer thee And then asked Where is God's Right Hand Being again Demanded by W. C. Whether he had whole Christ in him He Answered I know nothing of Christ but within my self He said That a man might be come to the Resurrection and have the Resurrection and yet not Past iâ—e That the Resurrection being once come it Remains and so is not Past At which Rate it will not be Past in Heaven after the Resurrection But this is a Fetch of the Quakers to make their Denyal of the Resurrection appear not to be the same with that of Hymeneus and Philetus 2 Tim. 2.18 With which it is the very same and St. Paul calls it 〈◊〉 overthrowing of the Faith For he did not oppose them in the State of the Blessed after the Resurrection being a Remaining State and not to Pass away But in that they said the Resurrection was already Past i. e. Inwardly brain'd by the Faithful and therefore no â—â—ster or outward Resurrection of the Body to be expected 5. Thomas Ellwood in his Answer before â—â—â—â—â—der'd p. 142 143. Repeats these words of George Whitehead's against our Notion of the Resurrection viz. And their Assertion and Determination therein is contrary to what the Apostle saith 2 Cor. V. For we know if our Earthly House of this Tabernacle were Dissolved we have a Building of God an House not made with hands Eternal in the Heavens For we that are in this Tabernacle do Groan being Burdened c. But why wou'd he close this with his c. So soon For the very next words in the same ver 4. wou'd have set him Right and Determin'd the cause fully on our side viz. Not for that we wou'd be un-cloathed but Cloathed upon that Mortality might be swallow'd up of Life i. e. Not that we wou'd be un-Cloathed or quite Divested of our Bodys but that a New Cloathing of Immortality shou'd be given to our Bodys The un-Cloathing is the Quaker Notion of the Resurrection The Cloathing upon is ours T. E. by way of excuse says p. 143. That G. W. wrote this against that Notion That the Happiness of the Soul is not Perfect without the Body and that the Soul hath a strong desire to a Re-Vnion to the Body This T. E. thought such an absurdity as that no Man wou'd own it Which shews how very far they have wander'd from the Truth in this Doctrine of the Resurrection For it is not doubted among Christians but the Soul hath a strong desire to a Re-Vnion with the Body And that her Joy is not Perfect i. e. Compleat before that time Which makes them Cry How Long O Lord Rev VI. 10. XXII 20. Holy and Just And Pray that God wou'd Hasten his Kingdom and Come Quickly And the Quakers endeavouring to Ridicule this as before is shewn is a Proof that they have more need of being Taught than Disputed against And instead of medling with Controversy shou'd be sent to Learn their Catechism But to Return to Thom. Curtis 6. The Account I have above given and all the Particulars I have seen under the hand of William Clarke the Person Concern'd And I am told That a Narrative of the whole Proceedings of that Monthly Meeting is like to be Published In the mean time the use I have to make of it is this to shew that the Quakers do still hold these Abominable Heresies and always have held them Notwithstanding of the shuffling excuses which T. E. G. W. and W. P. wou'd now put upon them If it be objected that Thom. Curtis is a Separatist from the Quakers of Grace-Church-street and joyned with those of Harp-Lane And therefore that those of Grace-Church-street are not Accountable for any thing he says or does Answ 1. Those of Harp-Lane are Answerable and all in Communion with them And my present business is to shew that these Vile Heresies are still Taught among the Quakers Answ 2. These of Harp-Lane did not separate from those of Grace-Church-street upon any Principle of Faith or Doctrine But meerly upon