Selected quad for the lemma: heart_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heart_n	accuse_v	conscience_n	law_n	3,144	5	5.7967	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47140	An exact narrative of the proceedings at Turners-Hall, the 11th of the month called June, 1696 together with the disputes and speeches there, between G. Keith and other Quakers, differing from him in some religious principles / the whole published and revised by Goerge Keith ; with an appendix containing some new passages to prove his opponents guilty of gross errors and self-contradictions.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.; Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.; Penn, William, 1644-1718.; Ellwood, Thomas, 1639-1713.	1696 (1696)	Wing K161; ESTC R14328	86,182	64

of those Churches c. Another Proof I bring against W. Penn is out of his Address to Protestants p. 119. printed 1692. the second Edition corrected and enlarged But this Passage remains in it however I will begin a little before the main thing For it seems p. 118. a most unreasonable thing that Faith in God and in keeping his Commands should be no part of the Christian Religion But if a part it be as upon serious Reflection who dare deny it then those before ●nd since Christ's time who never had the external Law and have done the things contained in the Law their Consciences not accusing nor Hearts condemning but excusing them before God are in some degree concerned in the Character of a true Christian for Christ himself preached and kept his Father's Commandments and came to fulfil and not destroy the Law and that not only in his own Person but that the Righteousness of the Law might also be fulfilled in us Now comes the main thing Let us but soberly consider what Christ is and we shall the better know whether Moral Men are to be reckon'd Christians What is Christ but Meekness Justice Mercy Patience Charity and Vertue in Perfection Can we then deny a meek Man to be a Christian a just a merciful a patient a charitable and vertuous Man to be like Christ But in this way of arguing there is a Fallacy these Moral Vertues are a Part of a Christian as Animal is a part of the Definition of a Man and belong to the Genus of a Christian But there are two things in the true Definition of a Man the Genus and the Differentia they have the Genus but not the Differentia therefore it is true to say every Man is an Animal but it is not true nor good Logick to say every Animal is a Man Let us but soberly consider saith William Penn what Christ is what is Christ but Meekness and Justice and Mercy and Patience And now take notice I would not misconstrue what I have read by William Penn's Argument a Man may be own'd to be a Christian and yet disbelieve that Christ is either God or Man if he own or practise a Habit or Quality of Moral Vertue as that of Justice and Meekness c. and practise accordingly tho he believe not in Christ if he have but some Moral Habits So that here the Jew is the Christian the Mahometan is the Christian the Pagan is the Christian and the professed Pelagian is the Christian tho they deny any inward supernatural Principle and call the Light within only natural as many sober and moral Men do why then have they so fiercely contended against such Men denying them to be Christians in whom as much of Mora●ity has appeared as in many of t●em But it is strange to heathenise all Christendom through calling them the World and christianise Heathens for their Morality See again the Christian Quaker p. 125 126 127. let me but recommend it to you to read the Book This Christian Quaker it is a Folio Book he bestows about three Pages to define what a Christian Quaker is In all this large De●●nition not one word of the Man Christ who is God over all blessed for ever to be the Object either of this Christian Quaker's Faith Love or Homage it is too large to reci●e but I recommend it to you to read it and shall go to the next Again see the Preface to R. Barclay's great Volume p. 36. where he makes the Work of Regeneration greater than the Manifestation of the Son of God in the Flesh R. Barclay is my Country-man I will not be partial to him on that account but I do not now blame any thing in his Book I know he is the soundest Writer among them But the thing I blame is a Preface supposed to be writ by W. Penn and however commended by G. Whitehead and some others By the Stile it is thought to be W. Penn's and it commonly goes under his Name These are the Words O Reader great is the Mystery of Godliness And if the Apostle said it of the Manifestation of the Son of God in t●e Flesh if that be a Mystery and if a Mystery it is not to be spelt out but by the Revelation of the Spirit how much more is the Work of Regeneration a Mystery that is wholly inward and spiritual in its Operation Who is sufficient for these things Now pray take notice that I tell you I cast no Reflection on R. Barclay I blame nothing at present in his Books tho there may be things both in his Books and mine that may need Correction If there be any Reflection on him it is chiefly this that such an unsound Preface should be put to his Book for I can sufficiently prove that R. Barclay's Doctrine is plainly Antipodes to this Doctrine O Reader great is the Mystery of Godliness for which is cited 1 Tim. 3.16 Great is the M●stery of Godliness God manifest in the Flesh c. which all Christendom judg to be God manifest in Christ's outward Body of Flesh and but consequentially of his Spirit and Grace in Men and I think it 's the greatest Mystery next to that of the Holy Three in One and One in Three the Manifestation of the Son of God in that Body of Flesh is next to that Now you see how he makes Regeneration in a Believer a greater Mystery than the Manifestation of the Son of God in his Body of Flesh How much more saith he is the Work of Regeneration a Mystery For the other here 1 Tim. 3. ●6 he does not say it is a Mystery but he puts three ifs to it If a M●stery c. Pray was our blessed Lord a mere Shell Was he like the Shell of an Egg without the Meat of an Egg or was he like the Shell of any Fruit and no Kernel in it Was there any Holiness ever in any Prophet or Apostle but it is like a Drop to the Ocean to what was in ●ur blessed Lord Therefore to compare the Work of Regeneration to the Incarnation of our Lord so as to equal it he prefers it and does not equal it only I appeal to you whether is it not a most abominable Error and whether it doth not make every regenerate Man not only equal to the Man Christ but greater for we truly value any Man as more holy according as the Manifestation of God is more in one Man than in another It is not enough to say he has unadvisedly dropt this Doctrine but it is his main Aim in divers of his Books See W. Penn's Rejoinder p. 330 337 340. where he makes Christ in the Gentiles a greater Mystery than Christ incarnate p. 335. J. Faldo is now in his Grave and I confess I never thought I should be raised up to vindicate J. Faldo I cannot say I ever read the fourth Part of this Book of W. Penn's called his Rejoinder till within this

William Penn has blamed that in another unjustly which most unjustly he justifies in himself and in his Tyrannical Brethren of his Party who for no other cause did excommunicate me but for not obeying their most unjust and unreasonable demand which was To clear the Body of the People called Quakers and their Ministry from some of the Errors charged upon them in Pensilvania which as I at that very Meeting told them I could prove some of them were guilty of and which I have since effectually done And that William Penn thinks it was such a notable Argumentum ad hominem that Rob. Norwood used to them who did excommunicate him Are none the People of God but your selves Have not I the same Argumentum ad hominem against them that excommunicated me who in their Nameless Bull of Excommunication given out against me at the Yearly Meeting at London 1695. call themselves the Church of Christ from which they say I have separated my self And because I could not obey their most unjust and unreasonable Demand they pass this Judgment against me as if they were the only Church of Christ and in their Yearly Epistle this very year 1696. directed to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings in England Wales and elsewhere they call themselves to wit those that generally go under the Name Quakors professing Unity with them God's whole Heritage and People this agreeth with Solomon Eccles Paper called The Quakers Challenge p. 2 3. 1668. The Quakers are in Truth and none but they The Tabernacle of God is with you and his Dwelling Place is among you and only among you is God known said Edw. Burrough to the Quakers see his Works page 64. 2. In the same Rejoinder page 310. he hath a Passage that is either perfect Nonsense or Antichristian Doctrine or rather indeed both I shall cite it verbatim Seventhly Because that Flesh of Christ is called a Vail but he himself is within the Vail which is the Holy of Holiest whereinto Christ Jesus our High-Priest hath entred Heb. 10.20 21. And as he descended into and past through a suffering-state in his fleshly appearance and returned into that state of Immortality and Eternal Life and Glory from whence he humbled himself which was and is the Holy of Holiest then obscured or hid by his Flesh or Body the Vail while in the world so must all know a death to their fleshly ways and Religions yea their knowledge of Christ himself after the flesh or they stick in the Vail and never enter into the Holy of Holies nor come to know him in any spiritual relation as their High and Holy Priest that abides therein Annot. I shall make no large Commentary on these words only in short note 1. His saying Christ has entred into the Holy of Holies within the Vail and that Vail is his Flesh and that Holy of Holies is himself What Nonsense is this Was not Christ always in himself 2. His entring in within the Vail of his Flesh is either perfect Nonsense or it hath this sense That he hath put off his Body he had on earth and is separated from it as one Robert Young a Preacher among the Quakers in Pensilvania at a Meeting affirmed and brought these very words of W. Penn's to confirm it That Christ hath entred within the Vail and Christ's flesh is that Vail whereas it is plain and generally understood by all Christians That the Vail within which Christ is entred according to Heb. 6.19 is not his flesh though elsewhere but in another respect his flesh is called a Vail the word Vail having divers significations in Scripture 3. That he saith That all must know a death to their knowledge of Christ after the flesh it is plain from his words that he hath this unsound sense of it That they must know a death to the knowledge of Christ after the flesh as that flesh signifieth the flesh of Christ as he came in the flesh But this is a perversion of Paul's words as if Paul had rejected the knowledge of Christ as he came and suffered in the flesh as inconsistent with the revelation of Christ in himself which are so consistent that as none have the saving knowledge of Christ as he came and suffered in the flesh without the inward revelation of him in their hearts so none have that inward revelation of him sufficient to Eternal Salvation but who by that inward revelation know and believe that he came and suffered in the flesh and that he is now in Heaven in the same Body that suffered the same I say as to Substance though wonderfully changed in Mann●r and Condition 3. W P. in a Book he calleth Truth exalted presented to Princes Priests and People reprinted Anno 1671. he giveth a large description of the Quakers Christ as he calleth him pag. 13 14. without mentioning in the least his Birth in the flesh Death Resurrection Ascension as the Son of Man or the Son of Abraham and David and wholly applying that Isaiah 9.6 7. Unto us a child is born and Deut. ●1 18 A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to the Inward Principle of the Light in all men and thus he describeth the Quakers Christ pag. 14. This is the second Adam the quickening Spirit the Lord from Heaven the new and spiritual man the Heavenly Bread the true Vine the Flesh and Blood that was given for the Life of the World the second Covenant the Law writ in the Heart and Spirit put in the inward parts the way in which the fool cannot err the Truth before Deceit was the Life that 's hid in God eternal in the Heavens glorified before the world began the Power the Wisdom the Righteousness of God the Plant of Renown the Royal Seed that bruiseth the Serpent's head in short that Grace which hath appeared unto all men teaching them to deny Ungodliness c. Annot. By this it is plain he makes nothing of Christ but an inward Principle in all men which yet falsly he calls the second Covenant the Law written in the heart for the Law writ in the heart that is the second Covenant is not in any Unbelievers but only in the hearts of True Believers Again in his large description of the Christian Quaker filling Three Pages of his Folio called the Christian Quaker he mentions not one word of Christ as he was born of the Virgin suffered death for our sins rose again c. as the Object of Faith Hope or Love or Christian Devotion see his Pages 125 126 127. By which it plainly appears that he and G Whithead and many other Teachers among the Quakers have no other Notion of Christ but an Inward Principle which is manifestly contrary to the Gospel preached by the Holy Prophets Evangelists and Apostles who preached Christ chiefly without men as both God and Man and consequentially his Light and Grace and Spirit within men I shall now point at some of W. Penn's most gross and