Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	call_v	church_n	holy_a	7,200	5	5.2401	4	false

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

palpable Contradictions 1. His first Contradiction In the Treatise of Oaths above-mentioned signed particularly by William Penn he is earnest against all Oaths under the Gospel and yet in his Reason against Railing he useth the greatest Oath that ever was used among the Jews to wit As God liveth or The Lord liveth which was the form of their Oath as is clear from many places of Scripture but particularly Jerem 4.2.5.2 Now let us hear how he himself hath practically used this Oath against Thomas Hicks pag. 180. O that these heavy things might not be laid to thy charge for so sure as God liveth great will be the Wrath that shall follow yea God will visit for these unrighteous dealings 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 and by this shalt thou know that not a Lying or Delusive but a True and Infallible Spirit hath spoken by me Annot. These words imply some Prophecy that W. Penn thought he had from the Infallible Spirit of God against Tho. Hicks importing he should be made an Example of his Fury But they that saw Tho. Hicks dye and knew him living say nothing of this was fulfilled nor did any thing extraordinary as any Example of Divine Fury happen to Tho. Hicks either before he died or at his death 2. His second Contradiction is this In the Book called Judas and the Jews pag 13. owned and signed by W. Penn he thus glosseth on Matth 18.17 Go tell the Church That Christ as well gave his Church Power to reject as to try Spirits is not hard to prove that Notable Passage Go tell the Church does it to our hand for if in case of private Offence 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 Annot. This he spoke with respect to the Quakers Church whose Power he so mightily extols that she is made Absolute Judge from whom there is no Appeal in this world But having to do with the Church of England or any other Church of them called Protestants we shall see how he makes a contradictory Gloss on the same Text Matth. 18.17 Go tell the Church In his Address to Protestants second Edition p. 152. he saith But what then can be the meaning of Christ's words Go tell the Church Very well I answer It 's not about Faith but Injury that Christ speaks and the place explains it self Moreover If thy brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone here is Wrong not Religion Injustice not Faith or Conscience concerned as some would have it to maintain their Church-Power Annot. Here you see he makes the Church-Power very low as by Church he means the Church of England or any other Church besides the Church of the Quakers But when he means the Church of the Quakers from the same Text he magnifies her Power as great as ever Bellarmine or any other Jesuit magnified the Church of Rome She to wit the Quakers Church otherwise tell us what other Church he means is made Absolute Judge from whom there is no Appeal in this world Then be sure if W. Penn can prevail to keep up this Authority in the Quakers Church neither G Keith nor any other against whom that he calleth the Church to wit the Yearly Meeting at London hath passed any Sentence however unjust must expect to have any Relief or Redress in this world Well It is a great Comfort that we may expect it in the world to come If this be not to play the Ambidexter a Crime T. Elwood unjustly casteth on me in another case I know not what is 3. His Third Contradiction is this In his Address to Protestants second Edition pag. 246. he saith Men that are angry for God passionate for Christ that can call Names for Religion and sling Stones for Faith may tell us they are Christians if they will but no body would know them to be such by their fruits to be sure they are no Christians of Christ's making Annot. One would think this man would be far from giving hard Names to any that differ from him in Religious Matters and that he would be one of the civilest men on earth for softly and gently treating his Opponents But instead thereof I know not if ever I read or heard more angry and passionate words and more und●cent and unbecoming any man either Christian or sober Heathen than William Penn hath given to his Opponents and such as he hath differed from in Religious Matters witness what he saith in his Guide mistaken p. 18. 1668 The old Gormandizing Priests of England No sort of people have been so universally through Ages the Bane of Soul and Body of the Universe as that abominable Tribe for whom the Theatre of God's most dreadful Vengeance is reserved to act their eternal Tragedy upon Again in his Quakerism a new Nickname c. p. 165. he saith But in the earth there is not any thing so phant●stical conceited proud railing busy-body and sometimes ignorant as a sort of Priests to us not unknown among whom our Adversary viz. John Faldo an Independent Preacher is not the least who think their Coat will bear out their worst Expressions for Religion and practise an haughty Reviling for Christ as one of the greatest demonstrations of their Zeal an Ill bred and Pedentick Crew the Bane of Reason and Pest of the World the old Incendi●ries to mischief and the best to be spared of Mankind against whom the boiling Vengeance of an irritated God is rea●ly to be poured out to the destruction of such if they repent not and turn from their abominable Deceits Annot. Seeing the only Reason that was given at the Meeting at Turner's Hall the 11th of this Instant 1696. by one of William Penn's Party why they excommunicated George Keith having nothing either against his Doctrine or Conversation among men but that he was as he was pleased to call me a little petulant and turbulent Man and that they have aggravated some few words I gave to some professed Infidels among us in Pensilvania to that height as deserving Excommunication Let the Impartial Reader judge whether W. Penn has not far exceeded me and that incomparably for I thank God I have not the faculty to invent such words as well as George Whithead hath also done in calling some that but differed from him about Womens Meetings and Church Orders of G. Fox Incarnate Devils Wolves Dogs in his Preface to Judgment Fixed 1682. Behold therefore their Injustice and Partiality for when did they ever so much as censure either of them for such scurrilous abusive Language or any others that have used the like Nay

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

the Blood of the Human Nature nor that the Soul of Christ was the Human Nature or was put to death with the Body for the Wicked could not kill the Soul though his Soul was made an Offering for Sin and he poured it out to Death he bore the Sin of many and made intercession for Transgressors but what Death and in what manner was it is a Mystery truly to know for his Soul in his own being was immortal and and the Nature of God is divine and therefore that the Blood of God should be of human or earthly nature appears inconsistent and where doth the Scripture call the Blood of God Human or Human Nature Neither do we read that the Blood which beareth Record in the Earth and agrees in one with the Spirit and which purgeth the Conscience washeth and cleanseth the Believer in the Light from all Sin was ever called by the Apostles the Blood of the Human Nature Nor do we read that the Saints did eat and drink Flesh and Blood that was of a human nature to receive Divine Life in them thereby for the Water of Life and Blood of Christ which are said to wash sanctifie and justifie which agrees with the Spirit in those Works and Effects We never read that they are called in Scripture by the name of Human Nature for the Spirit that quickens is divine and it is the Spirit that gives Life the Flesh profiteth nothing John 6. Now this unsound Doctrine of G. W. doth so well agree with that in John Humphrey's two Letters abovementioned that John Humphrey seems to have been his Disciple in the Case and it is certain this sort of Doctrine of G. Whitehead hath corrupted the Minds of many We see he will not own either the Flesh or Blood of Christ or Soul of Christ to belong to the human nature Annotat. Before I understood the Mystery of Iniquity and Antichristianism that lay hid under the finding fault with this name or term Human Nature of Christ and his Humanity observing that divers found fault with it I was ready to excuse them thinking that tho' they disowned the term Human yet they owned that signified by it to wit the real Manhood of Christ having a real Soul and Body that is not the Godhead but most gloriously united therewith And accordingly I did in part excuse them as in my Book The True Christ owned pag. 20 and pag. 105 I cited some words of Hilarius Lib. 10. de Trinitate Quid per Naturam Humani corporis concepta ex Spiritu S. caro judicatur i. e. Why is the Flesh conceived of the Holy Ghost judged by the nature of an Human Body But neither Hilarius nor I judged that the Body though conceived of the Holy Ghost was any part of the Substance of the Holy Ghost the Particle of in that place denoting the Holy Ghost to be the Efficient Cause of that Conception but not the Material But that my Mind and Sense that Christ had the true Nature of Man of Soul and Body neither of which were the Godhead was sound then as now and the same as now plainly appears from Page 20. of my Book above cited where I say Human Soul may signify the true Soul of Man having all the essential properties of man's Soul and its whole Perfection And if in this sense any will say That Christ hath a Human Soul and call the Manhood of Christ his Humanity there needeth no contention about it For in the Latin Tongue we have not a word so proper as Humanitas to signify the Manhood and if we may say Humanitas in Latin we may say in English Humanity G Whithead his Objection against the word Human as signifying Earthly hath the same force against calling Christ Adam coming from the Hebrew word Adamah that signifieth Earth And the Scripture calleth the Man Christ the second Adam and certainly the Man Christ had not only that which was Heavenly but had even our Earthly part but without sin his Body being nourished with Earthly Food which Body now glorified is Heavenly But that I differed as much in Doctrine from G. Whithead then as now as concerning the Blood of Christ and the sense of that place of Scripture Acts 20.28 what that Blood of God was wherewith he purchased his Church he affirming it was the Blood not of the Human Nature or Humanity but of the Divine Nature as may be seen above appears in my Book above-mentioned The true Christ owned pag. 94. I expresly say I grant that there is such a figurative speech of the Communication of Names and Properties whereby the Man Christ is called God and also God is called Man and God is said to have shed his Blood although Christ as God hath not Blood to shed but only as Man yet by reason of that most rare and wonderful Union betwixt the Godhead and Manhood the Blood of the Man Christ is called the Blood of God Acts 20.28 This may serve as one great Instance to shew That as I am not changed in this Doctrine from what I was many years ago that Book of mine being printed Anno 1679. so I did then as widely differ from G. W. in that great Article of Faith as I do now But I confess I knew not that any such absurd Doctrine was in his Books till of late that I made a more narrow search occasioned by his defending the same Errors in his Pensilvanian Brethren Again In the same Answer to T. Danson's Synopsis T. D having affirmed that there is a continual need of Faith and Repentance in this life G. Whithead answereth That there is a continual need of Repentance this I deny for true Repentance where it is wrought and the fruits of it brought forth this is unto Salvation never to be repented of and is attended with a real forsaking of sin and transgression Annot. G. Whithead's Ignorance greatly appeareth in this that he thinks Repentance and Perfection inconsistent but it is a strange Perfection that destroyeth an Evangelical Virtue and a Fruit of the Spirit such as Repentance is and what is Repentance A change of the mind or a transformation of the mind as the Greek word Englished Repentance implieth or more particularly true Evangelical Repentance is a great aversion and perfect hatred of the soul to all sin and a deep humiliation before God with godly sorrow and contrition of soul for sins past which is very consistent with and very becoming the most perfect and holy men that ever lived since all have sinned It seems it is from this great Error that he and many others of his Brethren seldom if ever pray for Forgiveness of sin at least for themselves for if there be no need of Repentance it will follow that there is no need of praying for Forgiveness But all sound Christians of true spiritual experience do know that both Repentance for sin and praying for Forgiveness of sin are well consistent with the greatest degree

of Holiness attainable in this life Nor doth the praying for Forgiveness imply universally the want of it more than the praying for the Spirit implieth the want of it Again Whereas it was said in the above Narrative That G. Whithead hath allegorized away the Birth Death Resurrection and coming again of Christ without us to Judgment take these plain Proofs 1. His allegorizing away his Birth prophesied of by Isaiah 9 6. Unto us a child is born a Son is given This he expoundeth of Christ born within He-Goats Horn Page 51. 2. He allegorizeth away his Resurrection expresly denying that Christ was bodily seen of Paul and perverting that place in 1 Cor. 15.8 to Christ within Page 51. 3. He allegorizeth away his coming without us to Judgment in these Scriptures Matth. 16.27 28 1 Thes 4 15 16 17 Light and Life Page 40 41. 4. Both he and Richard Hubberthorne allegorize away his Burial Light and Life Page 52. and He-Goats Horn Page 62 perverting that Scripture Isa 53. He made his grave with the wicked he adulterates the true Translation and turns it in the wicked which the Hebrew doth not bear Where see a most absurd account of the Resurrection turning it wholly to the Resurrection of two Seeds in two Bodies within men 5. He allegorizeth away the Resurrection of the Saints Bodies by his perversion of that place of Scripture Who shall change our vile body and fashion it like to his glorious body Phil. 3.21 to a change of the Body that the Apostles and Saints witnessed before death and yet in contradiction to that in his Real Quaker a Real Protestant Page 105. he understands that very place of a change of the vile or low and humble Body like unto the glorious Body of Christ as a thing to come Some other of Geo. Whithead's Contradictions 1. GEO. Whithead in his Light and Life page 69. thinks him a very blind and ignorant man that reckons Bodies Celestial and Terrestrial to be all one in Matter and Substance and yet the same G. W. in malice of the Independant Agent pag. 17. recited and approved by John Pennington Apostat expos'd p. 16. owns that Christ's Body now in Heaven is the same in substance he had on earth So by his own words he hath declared himself to be a blind and ignorant man and yet Infallible otherwise by his own word no true Minister 2. In a late printed Half sheet signed by him and seventeen more he owneth Christ to be both God and Man and owneth the Humanity of Christ making it synonimous with Manhood and yet it is proved in the above Narrative that he neither owneth him to be God or Man finding fault with W. Burnet for saying that Christ as God had a Father and had Glory with God before the world began arguing as the Socinians do that this would imply two Gods s●e Light and Life page 47. Again He finds fault with T. Danson for saying that the Man Christ had a Created Soul Answer to T D. 's Synopsis p. 18. And he blames R. G. for saying Christ hath a Bodily Existence without us in Heaven Nat. of Christianity page 41. 3. In his late Answer to the Queries sent to the Yearly Meeting of the people called Quakers at London signed by Dr. Lancaster Chaplain to the Bishop of London he owns the Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed to be a part of the Sacrifice even Christ's Blood that was shed without the gates of Jerusalem together with the whole Sacrifice of himself both of Soul and Body was a true Propitiation and Atonement for man's Reconciliation and Peace with God for Remission of sin through a living Faith and true Repentance c. But in his Light and Life he denieth that the outward Blood was that by which we are either sanctified or justified and calleth it a Type and saith the shedding of it was a wicked man's act from whence he inferreth that we are not justified by the outward Blood but pleadeth that the Offering Passover Blood by which we are cleansed is within as the New Covenant is and not without See in the Narrative above And this sort of Unchristian Doctrine G. Whithead as many others did receive neither from the Spirit of Christ within nor from the Holy Scriptures but as it seems from G. Fox who in a printed Paper of his having this Title To all People in Christendom concerning Perfect Love c. also concerning Christ's Flesh which was offered which printed Paper I have it is joined with some other printed Papers under this general Title Several Papers given forth for the spreading of Truth See Page 55 57 59. hath very unsound and unchristian Doctrine concerning Christ's Flesh that is the Offering in which is the belief by Christ's Flesh meaning not his outward Flesh Some of his words I shall faithfully recite as followeth that to me are very unsound and I believe in general to all sound in the Faith And Christ according to the flesh crucified the Lamb slain that flesh of his which is a Mystery when the first Adam's and Eve's flesh was defiled and so death reigned from Adam to Moses pag 55. And Pag. 57. So Adam's Eve's flesh was defiled but the flesh of Christ the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world yet his flesh never corrupted which flesh is the offering for as he was God he did not dye and this flesh is a Mystery and in this fl●sh Note is the belief that takes away the sin that never corrupted that is the Offering for sin and the Blood of this flesh cleanseth from sin p. 58. Now they that are in the belief of this fl●sh and offering sees over all offerings to the beginning into the Glory which was with the Father before the world began for all outward Offerings and Sacrifices was given to man after he fell and the Lamb slain which Offering is a Figure of Christ the Seed to be brought forth and offered up and he the Top stone over all laid to end and finish all the outward Offerings and Types and Shadows and in him there is none Page 59. So through this Offering is the Reconciliation through the offering of his flesh that never corrupted but takes away corruptions and his Blood cleanseth from Corruptions the Life real And so this pure Flesh this Offering is set over all which never corrupted which must be your meat if you live Though there is more in all these things which is hard to be uttered and cannot be uttered Yet Annot. It seems what G. Fox did not so fully utter as to this Mystery George Whithead had a mind to utter in his Book called Light and Life that may be as a proper Key to these dark Sayings of George Fox If any object to me as Th Elwood hath done in his Book falsly called Truth defended That I have in some of my Books owned Christ's flesh and Blood within I answer I confess it but no otherwise but

Quakers Books that seemed to me unsound but in an Excess of Charity I did construe them to be better meant than worded and that they had rather unwarily slipped from them than that they were the Expressions of their unsound Mind until that of late I had found them to justify the same and the like unsound Words in my Adversaries in Pensilvania and to hate and excommunicate me for telling them of them * And by this same Argument they need not preach his Example of holy Life nor the Example of the holy Lives of the Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles nor the Creation of the World nor any of God's gracious Providences towards his Church and People in former Ages they all being past and Persons not to live again in Mortal Bodies But why do the Quakers labour to keep up the the Remembrance of their deceased Friends and their Works and Sayings and collect them in Print for Posterity Is not the keeping in Memory the Birth Life Death and Resurrection c. of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ infinitely of more Value to be remembred and what is the way to have it remembred according to God's ordinary manner of working if not by preaching O what great Blindness and Ignorance is this of W. Penns * See his and my Answer to the Students in Aberdeer called Quakerism confirmed in the Collection of his Works called Truth triumphant pag. 627. Prop. 3. we say That the same Seed and Life is in us which was in him viz. the Man Christ and is in him in the Fulness as Water in the Spring and in us as the Stream As the natural Life is in all the Members but more principally in the Head and Heart without any Division so this spiritual Life and Nature is both in Christ our Head and in us by which he dwelleth in us as the Spirit of Man doth in the Body Again p. 628. Prop. 10. As for the Satisfaction of Chritst without us we own it against the Socinians c. And pag. 629. The Doctrines of the Incarnation Sufferings Death and Resurrection of Christ c. are necessary every where to be preached See the Places at more length than which nothing can be more contradictory than W. Penn's Doctrine as will appear in divers Places in this Treatise from his own Words faithfully quoted out of his Books ‖ This Writer is J. Reuclinus de verbo mirifico lib. 3. cap. 2. Gal. 3.16 ‖ But is not the Serpent or Devil without Men as well as within many Men (a) See W. Penn's Rejoynder pag. 284. And G. W. Light and Life p. 44. (b) See his Book pag. 35. called The Capital Principles (c) It is no more Nonsense than many good Christian Teachers have used to expound and open the Types of the Old Testament and to shew how they directed to Christ the Antitype yea divers Quakers Preach the Types as directing to Christ and his Spirit within And G. Fox used much to Preach upon the Types of the Old Testament as the Booths they made at the Feast of Tabernacles and the Lamps in the Temple and the Snuffers how they had a Spiritual signification And shall any Christian say that none of these Types signified Christ without but only Christ within (d) See for this in the Church-History of Socrates Scholasticus lib. 2. c. 7. and c. 25. (e) Note The Meeting was for most part orderly and attentive if any little Disorder happened it was by occasion of W. Pen's Party and particularly by Henry Goldney that threw printed Papers among the People in the Meeting on purpose to make a Disturbance but what Disturbance happened it was soon ended by the Care and Diligence of the Marshal sent by the Lord Mayor to prevent any Disorders (f) Note here two Gods of one Kind and Nature by his absurd Logick and false Philosophy one that worketh another that is wrought Oh gross Darkness and Ignorance in G. Whitehead (g) The Saints are partakers of the Divine Nature and so are they of the Holy Ghost is therefore the Holy Ghost a Work or Effect wrought in us This is to comfound the Creator with the Creature and is a Divinity more fit for Bedlam than any sober Society of People (h) And in Egypt we hear that Chickens are bred of Eggs simply by heat without the Hen. (i) N. Marks doth not profess himself to be Infallible being not of the Ministry But whence is it that the Laicks should own themselves Fallible and the Min●stry Infallible But at last it is come to this that some of the Ministry are Fallible also but such Principal Ministers as G. W. are not (a) Tho some in Scotland being influenced with their false reports have seemed to disown me yet others have not and some of them have writ kindly to me and owned me (a) Arthur Cook a Preacher and Justice of Peace in Pensilvania (b) Too high a Title for such who are quilty of such gross Errors (c) The third was 〈◊〉 they blamed me for saying the best Saints had need to come alwa●s to God by the 〈◊〉 ●or the Man Christ Jesus they said They could come to God with●ut him and this 〈◊〉 of Doctrine is to be found in W. Shewen's Book a Quaker greatly owned by them Treatise of Thoughts see pag. 37.38 (a) And I was cleared by a publick Writ signed by the Deputy Governor C. Markham and the Counsel in Philadelphia which I have to show See the Nature of Ch. pag. 29. * The real Quaker A real Protestant Nature of Christian p. 29 * G. Keith doth not charge it on the whole but only on the Guilty and such as cloak and excuse them * Note They told me It was sufficient to name a Few of Many to prove T. E. guilty of wronging me in his Books Let the Quotations be read out of R. B's Anarc * There is not mentioned any Day Month or Year wherein the yearly Meeting at Philad was held (a) Note W. Penn as is proved hath said We need not preach it the necessary consequence whereof is They need not believe it (b) So nor have they answer'd my Book Gross Error and Hypocrisie detected nor my Book against Samuel Jennings So here are Two for Two But I think I have effectually answer'd them here as to the main and so I hope will many others judge (c) I call it not G. Keith's Church otherwise than as related to them as one of them as I call the other their Church N. Mark 's Church i. e. to which he is related but he did well to own his Fallibility seeing he gave so great a Proof of it not long ago by severely accusing a poor innocent Maid-servant of his of Theft whose Innocency soon after was manifest to him * Called the Christian Faith