was scandalized with these words An Hundred Years ago the Church of England has very well answered this fallacious Argument of W. Penn's that is the same with the Socinians in her Homily on Salvation the First Part. And here he gives Nine Arguments to prove that the Notion of Christ's Satisfaction for Sin brings with it Nine irrational Consequences and Irreligious But they are so weak and insignificant that it were but loss of time to mention them here or answer them Only give me leave to add These very Persons G. Whitehead and W. Penn after they have thrust out of Doors by their false Logick Christ's Satisfaction without us they own that Christ in us offereth up himself a Sacrifice to appease the wrath of God Now if free forgiveness exclude the Satisfaction of Christ without us by W. Penn's Argument by the same it does as much exclude his Satisfaction within us pray mark that Now you have heard a Proof from W. Penn let me come to Geo. Whitehead again You shall have here a rare Dish of Divinity not that I would provoke any to Lightness But I have read many Books in my time but I never read such a Book except the Ranters in my Life Popery is Orthodoxy to it No Popish Priest will Argue as he has done G. Whitehead's Light and Life pag. 8. He blames here W. Burnet for saying The Blood shed upon the Cross sprinkles the Conscience Sanctifies Justifies Redeems us Now here is G. Whitehead's Censure of him Observe here a two-fold stress is laid upon that Blood 1. Merit to Salvation 2. Work to Sanctification And so he hath set it up above God for God could not save he saith Observ To say That Christ's Blood merits Salvation is to set it up above God for God could not save he saith Now he wrongs W. Burnet I know not the Man his words are these which some where or other I have noted W. Burnet says Christ as God without being Man he could not save But I wholly wave that Dispute I think it is above man's Capacity whether Antecedently to God's purpose he could have saved us without the Death of his own dear Son But God having so ordained it consequentially to his purpose it may be as safely and truly said as when the Scripture saith God cannot lye Is it any Reflection to say God cannot lye and that he cannot contradict his purpose And the Scripture says God has not appointed us to wrath but to obtain Salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ I hope then he cannot save us without the Man Christ because he has said he will not and the Man Christ is a Joynt-Saviour with God the Father Again pag. 38. G. W. brings the words of W. Burnet thus Bapt. 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 Antitype of that Temple viz. to Jesus Christ as he was there crucified or to that Blood that was there shed for Justification p. 24. Now see the Answer The Quakers see no need of directing Men to the Type for the Antitype neither to the outward Temple nor yet to Jerusalem either to Jesus Christ or his Blood knowing that neither the Righteousness of Faith nor the word of it doth so direct Rom. 10. And is it the Baptists Doctrine to direct Men to the Material Temple and Jerusalem the Type for the Antitype What Nonsense and Darkness is this And where do the Scriptures say the Blood was there shed for Justification and that Men must be directed to Jerusalem to it It may be questioned whether there may not be some need to expound the Types as directing to Christ though not to practâ—ce them But let that pass Now he says it is contrary to Rom. 10. to direct People to Jesus Christ as he was crucified at Jerusalem But let the Bible be Judge He has not cited the Verse but the Verses he aims at I shall read Ver. 5 6 7 8. For Moses describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law that the man which doeth those things shall live by them c. See Verses 6 7.8 Now in their Preachments they have used to stop there and go no further But read the 9th Verse If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved And where was it that God raised Christ from the Dead Was it not at Jerusalem And there he died where he rose And Christ when he took the Cup said Drink ye all of it this is the New Testament in my Blood shed for many for the remission of sins And I believe he meant his Blood shed was the outward Blood of his Body Stranger Read the words again Which G. Keith did G. Keith You see G. Whitehead has falsified the Scriptures and made them to say what they say not as if to direct to Jesus Christ as he was crucified at Jerusalem and to his Blood that was there shed were contrary to Rom. 10. whereas it is plainly according to Rom. 10. 9,10 Quaker It may be something following may explain it read on Which G. Keith did Light and Life pag. 39. Whereas that Blood shed is not in being pag. 40 But the true Apostle directed them to the Light which is so much opposed by the Baptists to walk in the Light for the Blood of Jesus to cleanse them from all sin 1 John 1. And he died for our sins but rose again for our justification which Resurrection surely was after the shedding the blood outwardly G. Keith Neither W. Burnet nor no Baptist place the all and whole of our Justification on Christ's outward Sufferings and shedding his blood For I say with them and all Christendom That if Christ had died and not risen again he could not have been an Atonement for our sins Therefore both his Death and Resurrection are concerned in our Justification Give me leave to tell you one Passage The. Ellwood thinks to put a trick on the Reader and says it is wrong Printed and that it should have been for instead of to and he charges some Typographical Errors in my Books on me He says it was corrected in his Copy with a Pen buâ— he does not say G. Whitehead mended it He says it should be thus read Either for Jesus Chrisâ— or his Blood He thinks that will so turn it that it mends the matter but it mends it nothing at all And G. Whitehead has it to to to several times See pag. 38 39. Where do the Scriptures say saith G. W. the blood was there shed for Justification and that Men must be directed to Jerusalem to it Again in pag. 61. Light and Life he saith Another while People must seek their Saviour above the Clouds and Firmament contrary to the Righteousness of Faith Rom. 10.6 Another while they
must look to Jerusalem for Justification to the blood that was there shed contrary to Deut. 30.13 14. and Rom. 10. Is not this abominabâ—e Perversion of Scripture to confirm his Antichristian Doctrine Light and Life pag. 61. What Confusion what a Labyrinth and Uncertainty is he in and does he bring his Hearers into saith G. Whitehead of Will. Burnet because according to Scripture he asserts that Men must be directed to Christ for Justification and Salvation both as he suffered at Jerusalem and as he rose again and is ascended into Heaven above the Clouds and Firmament Next you shall hear Solomon Eccles's Letter That the blood of Christ is no more than the blood of another Saint Quaker N. M. I beg a Favour Here are several things urged as false Doctrine which refer to several places of Scripture which Scriptures ought also to be read G. Keith They have been read except Deut. 30. Rom. 10. is a repetition of Deut. 30. This is only to prolong time and hinder me to proceed in my Proofs But if the Auditory please I will read both Deut. 30. and Rom. 10. Auditory There is no need go on and read Solomon Eccles's Letter G. Keith Before I read the Letter let me read these Lines in G. Whitehead his Light and Life pag. 8. W. B. saith he tells of looking to Jerusalem to Jesus Christ as he was there crucified or to that blood that was there shed for Justification Contradiction That Christ that restoreth man's loss is both to be sought and found in Heaven c. but in contradiction to both the Reception of the Spirit the only means the gift of Christ to us and his being revealed in us by his Spirit Here you see G. Whitehead makes it a Contradiction that we must look to Christ as he died at Jerusalem and as he is now in Heaven Judge ye if this be a Contradiction but in Contradiction to both he saith it is a Contradiction to direct to Christ our Saviour as he died at Jerusalem and that Christ that saveth us is revealed within us by his Spirit Now the Letter which G. Whitehead does own it is a Letter of Solomon Eccles it is this Robert Porter TAKE heed of belying the Innocent for I hear that thou hast reported to a Friend of mine that I should say That the Blood of Christ is no more than the Blood of another Man I never spake it but do very highly esteem of the Blood of Christ to be more Excellent and Living and Holy and Precious than is able to be uttered by the Tongues of Men and Angels I mean the Blood which was offered up in the Eternal Spirit Heb. 9.14 But the Blood that was forced out of him by the Soldiers after he was dead who before that bowed his Head to the Father and gave up the Ghost but thou sayest that was the Blood of the New-Covenant which was shed after he was dead which I do deny yet I did say That was no more than the Blood of another Saint These were my Words which thou art wresting to thy own Destruction And for the other Lye that thou chargest me withal that I should say That the Blood of Christ should fall to the Ground within a twelfth Month it is false and never was spoke by me But I did say That the Baptists and Independants and Presbyterians and Pope are all of one Ground and none of you understand the Blood of Jesus Christ no more than a brute Beast therefore repent for God will suddenly overthrow your Faith and your imputative Righteousness too for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness which he did at Jerusalem and without the Gates the Pope the Episcopal the Presbyterian Independants and Baptists shall fare all alike and shall sit down in Sorrow short of the Eternal Rest But the true imputative Righteousness of Christ we own but it is hid from you all till the Lord do open an Eye within you Stranger Who Printed that Letter G. Keith W. Burnet the Baptist Preacher Have you any Testimony of their owning that Letter T. Slaughter I can answer to the Letter G. Keith It may be thou art the Man T. Slaughter I am not the Man but I have had a Copy of the Letter It was writ to one Porter at Wheâ—stone and the Letter is true Auditors Pray Sir where do you live and what is your Name T. Slaughter My Name is Thomas Slaughter I live at Darking I have a Son that is a Tallow Chandler that lives in Bow-Lane where you may have an Account of me G. Keith George Whitehead doth not question the Letter to be true but defends it and as much opposeth Justification by the outward or material Blood of Christ as Solomon Eccles doth Here is a weighty Passage George Whitehead says in his Book Light and Life which T. Ellwood transcribes and vindicates T. Ellwood represents G. Whitehead And this is one of the Books they say in their printed Paper they have sent and read at this Meeting I have not answered And this is G. Whitehead in Effigie I had charged G. Whitehead for saying That Christ's material Blood shed at Jerusalem was but a Type of the Blood we were justified by T. Ellwood finds fault with me for this And you shall see T. Ellwood's Vindication and how far G. VVhitehead has owned or disowned S. Eccles's Letter All things under the Law says VV. Burner in the Type was purged with Blood and this Blood was material Blood and not mystical and that Blood that Christ shed in order to the effecting the Salvation of Man must needs be visible and material Blood These are VV. Burnet's Words Now G. VVhitehead says Baptist All things under the Law in the Type was purged with Blood and this Blood was material Blood and not mystical and that Blood that Christ shed in order to the effecting the Salvation of Man must needs be material and visible Blood Answ. Do but mark here what sad Consequence he has drawn as if one should Reason that because the Type was material visible and not mystical therefore the Antitype or Substance must needs be material and not mystical By this all Mysteries or Divine things are excluded from being either Spiritual Antitype or Substance whereas it was the Heavenly things themselves that are in Christ in which consists the Substance and End of Types and Shadows But to say that material Blood was a Type of that which was material this is to give the Substance no Preheminence above the Type especially if neither of them be mystical nor in being or like as if one should say one Type was a Type of another Whereas both the Heavenly and more perfect Tabernacle and Altar with the Heavenly things are all a Mystery and Spiritual the Offering and Living Sacrifices are Spiritual the Passover Spiritual the Seed Spiritual the Bread the Fruit of the Vine Spiritual the Oyl the Flesh and the Blood which give Life to the Soul yea the
says T. Elwood in his way of quibling six and an half All these Manuscripts were read at the Meeting two years ago and for the Censure they gave of them I said I thought they had tho I confess I judg very mincingly censured these unsound expressions Yet Tho. Elwood tells me that I am guilty of Forgery that I said the Yearly Meeting said any thing like it Here is the Paper of the Yearly Meeting this Paper shews whom it came from does it find no fault with these Expressions in these Pensilvanian Papers Here is seven or eight I will read a few lines I have brought an Original here it is somewhat worn but it may be read well enough I am glad that my Neighbour has such Charity for me that he thinks I will not read wrong I can read every word of it tho it be somewhat worn I shall forfeit the Name of an honest man it I read one word different from the Original The words in John Humphrey's first Letter Who is he that dares to make a Distinction between Christ's Body and his Spirit and to put asunder what God hath joyned together Is not this to divide Christ to use that Terms viz. Christ within and Christ without when he himself in that very Body that suffered said he that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him and in that day we shall know that it is the very same that liveth in us that hath died for us which before we could not come to know altho any should tell us of it for Christ in us is the hope of Glory and they that draw us to look for Christ without we are not to go forth after them to divide Christ's Body from his Spirit I perceive by G. Keith's Ten Articles of Faith that they relish too much of Carnality a Carnal Body of Christ in Heaven a Carnal Election and Reprobation a Carnal Justification and Adoption a Carnal Day of Judgment and Resurrection beyond the Grave I am grieved to hear some say they did expect to be Justified by that Blood that was shed at Jerusalem Is 't not to be carnally minded I have not read the whole Letter but an intire Paragraph of it So farewel Christ without You divide Christ if you mention Christ without Now mark these Ten Articles of mine that he calls Carnal they are short will you hear them They are in Print My Adversaries sent them over from America to England and that before I came to England as an Inditement against me Frances Bugg met with them and Printed them my Adversaries here sent them about as a great Crime against me Some of the Principles of G. Keith and his Friends 1. That Bodily Sickness and Death came in by the Fall 2. That Christ has now in Heaven a Soul and a Body that is not the Godhead but the Temple of it and most gloriously united therewith 3. That Christ's Body that was Crucified and Buried without us rose again without us and is now in Heaven without us 4. That the Man Christ Jesus will come again in that Body without us to judg the Quick and the Dead 5. That there shall be a general day of Judgment that all the deceased Saints are in expectation of 6. That we get not the Resurrection of the Body either in this mortal Life or immediately after Death 7. That Faith in the Man Christ without us as he Died for us rose again and is gone into Heaven wrought in us by thy Spirit of Christ is universally necessary to make Men true Christians and Children of God born of the Free Woman who have the Spirit of Adoption crying Abba Father 8. That Christ's Obedience and Righteousness which he performed in himself without us is imputed to us by Faith for the Remission of Sins 9. That Christ is not only God's Elect but all that shall be saved from the beginning to the end of the World are God's Elect being chosen in him not only before they Believe and Repent but before the Foundation of the World 10. That all and every one of the Members of the Church of Christ who are at age can speak ought to confess with their Mouths in the hearing of some of their fellow Members the Fundamental Principles of their Christian Faith before they can be owned to be Members of the Church that by the same as well as by a good Life and Conversation it may be known who are qualified to be Members of our Church which is a boundary Term and Bond of our Union the Spirit being the Principal which may be easily done by Answering to some plain Questions G. Keith his Ten Articles read all condemned to be Carnal by the Pensilvania Letter of J. H. a Preacher among the Quakers there these Ten Articles were read at the Yearly Meeting at London 1694. and the Letter that Condemned them also read at the said Yearly Meeting and that Letter Justified by Th. Elwood the Patron and Advocate for that Yearly Meeting and therefore we ought if we give Credit to Th. Elwood to conclude that the Yearly Meeting at London 1694. hath concluded all these Ten Articles to be Carnal which yet express the Common Faith of all Christendom The Second Letter Read The Words of John Humphery's Second Letter I craved no favour to my Paper from thee nor them but that word only which was the omission of my Pen and never intended to be put under a Bushel if occasion did require But however let Deceit and Malice have its full force and scope upon it and that word only taken off the conclusion of my Paper which that saying of our Saviour himself when he Expounded his meaning unto them who in these days had offended at his own words will clear me of your Aspersion John 6.63 It is the Spirit that Quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing so he himself ascribed the Work of man's Salvation and Sanctification not to the Flesh that Suffered but to the Spirit that Quickned not to the Blood that was Shed at Jerusalem but unto the Flesh and Blood that is Spiritual which the Saints was to feed upon and their Robes was made white by and it doth appear that these that are otherwise minded do not rightly discern the Lord's Body Some of his own Fraternity perswaded him to put in the word only and that would excuse the matter he puts in the word only and he thinks it was against his Conscience and so bids put it out again Quaker Whether do ye own sanctification to the blood outwardly shed or to the Spirit inwardly given G. Keith I say to both to the blood of Christ that was outwardly shed at Jerusalem and to the Spirit of Christ inwardly given to believers Now they say that I have belied them they never knew any that said they were not sanctified by that blood You see what proofs I have brought and therefore I must be an Apostate for accusing them of errours
Water and Blood which washeth and sprinkleth the Conscience are all Spiritual and Mysterious as the New Covenant it self is which they belong to and these things known in And this is the new and living way which Christ set open through the Veil of his Flesh Heb. 10. Let them receive this who can Note By G. Whitehead's Argument as the New Covenant is Spiritual and inward and not outward so the Blood of the New Covenant is inward and not outward so the Passover is inward which is Christ the Mediator and not outward this is a plain denyal of the Man Christ without us to be our Mediator our Passover Offering or his Flesh and Blood without us to be concerned in our Salvation otherwise than as the Type That Christ's Flesh is called the Veil is not to be understood like the Typical Veils Figures and Shadows but hath a far greater and profound sense and consideration But mark W. Burnet does not express it universally but in this particular Case And G. Whitehead extends it to an Universal as if all the Types of the Old Testament signified nothing Internally and Spiritually But VV. Burnet saith no such thing though he justly contends that the material Blood of the Beasts that were offered was a Type of the material Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed yet many of the Types signified the internal and spiritual Gifts and Graces that true Believers have by Christ Now here I clinch the matter G. Whitehead says But to say material Blood was a Type of that which was material this is to give the Substance no preeminence above the Type especially if neither of them be mystical nor in being or like as if one should say one Type was a Type of another Now the Argument lies here If the Sacriffces under the Law were Types of Christ's Blood then that Blood must not be outward Blood but inward to wit the Light and Life in Men but this is a false Consequence of G. Whitehead and sheweth that he denieth Remission of Sin and Justification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed And this whole Passage of G. Whitehead his Advocate T. Ellwood doth defend in his Book called Truth Defended which is one of the two they say I have not answered Now as to the Letter we go on to what T. Elwood says He is so unfair he will have it that G. Whitehead owns that the material Bâ—ood of Christ is that by which we are justified But here is the Trick G. Whitehead makes a typical Offering of Christ and an anti-typical the typical was the Offering of Christ at Jerusalem the anti-typical is the Offering of Christ within See here then their Answer It was queried whether they owned that we are by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed justified or that the Blood that was outwardly shed did belong to the Sacrifice G. Whitehead has since of late answered Yea here they have sought to blind all the World Christ as he outwardly suffered was a Sacrifice but a typical Sacrifice Therefore the next Question to be put must be Whether he was the anti-typical Sacrâ—fice Now see what G. Whitehead hath said to the Letter of Solomon Eccles to blame or censure it I can find nothing at all He does not own that Solomon Eccles's Expression was an Article of their Faith but does he disown it Nay a man may not own a thing to be an Article of his Faith and yet not disown it If G. Whitehead had had the true Faith in Christ crucified and had the true Value of Christ's Blood outwardly shed he would have very severely and sharply blamed and censured Solomon Eccles's Letter as blasphemous but I find not that he censured it all He tells you in what Sence he owns it viz. That Blood had a peculiar Significatâ—on I told him so had the Blood of Beasts a peculiar Signification for their Blood signified Remission of Sin but was no satisfactory Offering for Sin And if Christ's Blood outwardly shed was a Type as G. Whitehead affirms it was then he confirms Solomon Eccles's false Doctrine and makes it no more than the Blood of the Beasts that were offered But saith T. Ellwood He does own that the Blood of Christ is more than the Blood of another Saint but what Bâ—ood the Blood of Christ within there is the Trick Is not this enough to cheat all the World They have a double Meaning as Arius had They say they own the Blood of Christ and every other thing said of him according to the Scripture so said the Arians and Macedonians when at other times they discovered their Meaning to be quite contrary to Scripture Quaker N. M. I offer a Word in Vindication which is this I am here an accidental Man as you are What I would offer is this 1. I acknowledge the Favour you give me leave to speak Next this little Tumult gives me Occasion to let you know that the principal Reason of the Persons not being here that were challenged was that Confusion and Disorder that would be the Consequence G. Keith Who makes it Quaker N. M. There are not fifteen of us here therefore we take care not to be parties to it The Persons challenged I do respect I know their own Ability I think my self not capable to speak in their behalf What I wouâ—d say is to the Letter The Letter you are to understand is the Effect of a Dispute between two Persons Though this Letter was writ by one that had Conversation with us yet I think we are not intitled to what is in it But if G. Whitehead hath writ in Vindication of it it affects us as a People And whatever we publish as a People we are so far affected with it But this Letter was writ by the Hand of a particular Man whose Conversation among us I think not fit to answer for G. Keith He was an Eminent Preacher among them Quaker He says G. Whitehead has vindicated this Letter now I observe G. Whitehead finds fault with the Letter G. Kâ—ith Here he makes G. Whitehead the Representative and Metropolitan of the Quakers saying what G. W. writes affects them as a People I am a Quaker still though I glory not in any Name but that I may be accounted a true Christian But he says if G. Whitehead has justified the Letter it is imputable to the Body What is this but to make G. Whitehead the Metropoâ—itan And I protest against it I have so much Charity and Knowledge of many of the Quakers that I believe there are Thousands will not own that Letter though G. Whitehead does He says if G. Whitehead justifies that Lettâ—r the whole Body is understood to justifie it Now I see not one Syllable wherein G. Whitehead blames it And he that does not testifie against a thing when he has just occasion for it justifies it But hear what G. Whitehead saith pag. 58. Light and Life Now to these words viz. No more than
the Blood of another Saint his intent was saith G. Whitehead as to Papists and you whose minds are carnal c. This never was my Quakerism For my belief all along was that Papists and Baptists and all have a Benefit by Christ's Death Now it is come to this That the Blood of Christ is no more to Papists and Baptists than the Blood of another Saint His next Defence of S. Eccles's Letter is That it was no more simply as to the matter of Blood Then they may with Reverence be it spoken as it was reported some have said say it is no more than the Blood of a Thief simply as to the matter of Blood but it may be affirmed that simply considered it was more than the Blood of any Saint for as it was never defiled with sin so his Body of Flesh and Blood had a Miraculous Conception above all other Men though it had the true Nature of our Flesh and Blood yet it had an Excellency above that of all other Men. But let us consider these words of S. E. which G. W. saith might satisfie any Spiritual or unbyassed Mind I do very highly esteem of the Blood of Christ to be more Excellent c. Here is Solomon Eccles's Fallacy and George Whitehead's Fallacy also Now you know what Blood they mean and see what Blood G. Whitehead means The Blood is Spiritual and Inward the other is a Type It is confessed saith G. W. Light and Life pag. 56. That God by his own Blood purchased to himself a Church Acts. 20.28 Now the Blood of God saith he or that Blood that relates to God must needs be Spiritual he being a Spirit and the Covenant of God is Inward and Spiritual and so is the Blood of it So you see he doth not allow the Blood outwardly shed to relate to God or to be the Blood of the New Covenant or that God purchased his Church with that Blood outwardly shed on the Cross Is not this a plain Justification of Solomon Eccles's Letter That that Blood is no more than that of another Saint judge ye who are Intelligent Again He judges none of them guilty of Blasphemy therein as he saith pag. 58. Light and Life viz. Neither Solomon Eccles nor W. Burnet But wherein does he charge him I find not in any thing I cannot produce and read to you many of my Proofs for want of time but two or three to every following Head You have had an Account of them as to Justification Now it is worth your while to see how these pretended Infallible Men contradict one another W. Penn Reason against Railing falls in with T. Danson and Argues like a Christian though in Contradiction to himself elsewhere That no Obedience that Man can perform to God by the help of the Spirit is strictly Meritorious according to the Law of God This is good Doctrine and so is the Reason too because it is but finite and I would make use of the same Argument But G. Whitehead in Answering this Argument Answers T. Danson thus Whereas T. Danson Argues That the Obedience and Righteousness wrought in the Saints by the Spirit is but finite and therefore not Meritorious G. Whitehead denies this that it is finite and saith it is infinite So that by his Argumenâ— our Obedience and Righteousness that God works in us is equal to God himself Now I will read the Passage W. Penn's Reason against Railing Pag. 82. Rewardableness is a work without which God will not bestow his Favour and yet not the meritorious Cause for that there is no proportion betwixt the work that is finite and temporary and the Reward which is infinite and eternal in which sense both the Creature obeys the Commands of God and does not merit but obtain only and God rewards the Creature and yet so that he freely gives too A good Protestant Argument and good Protestant Doctrine so far but that he contradicts it again by opposing the necessity of Faith in Christ crucified for Justification and totally excluding Christ's Satisfaction in order to Justification and Remission of sin You see W. Penn says the Work is finite and temporary and therefore does not strictly Merit But hear G. Whitehead in his Book called The Voice of Wisdom against Antichrist c. pag. 36. Printed at London Anno 1659. The Righteousness which God effects in us is not finite but infinite for Christ is God's Righteousness and Christ is formed in us Gal. 4.19 And so that Righteousness which God works in us by his Spirit is of the same Kind and Nature with that which worketh it for the Saints are made partakers of the Divine Nature 2 Pet. 1.4 Now if you think I have read wrong read it your selves Quaker I do not think so only I think the whole Paragraph should be read I hope you have all so much Christianity as rather to hope that what G. Keith has pretended to be a Proof that he cannot prove it than that he can For it were well if there were no Party of People that there could be any Proof against G. Keith I wish I had no occasion to produce any Proofs of this kind Quaker To pick here and there a piece out of two or three Books it is impracticable G. Keith They should have been here then to have defended it I will read the whole Paragraph to you Now I would haste to a Conclusion I have proved to you that they have excluded the Blood of Christ that we are not justified by the Blood outwardly shed I come to prove that they say we are not sanctified by that Blood I shall read to you G. Whitehead pag. 49 50 51. Here is one Proof if ye think this is not enough I will bring more Neither did I ever read says the Baptist that it was the Blood or Life of Christ in his People that we are justified by Now here is G. Whitehead's Answer Light and Life pag. 59. The Spirit of Christ which is Life doth both Quicken Sanctifie and Justifie the true Believers John 6.63 1 Cor. 6. And that Blood and Water that 's said to cleanse is not of another kind but agrees in one with the Spirit all which is known within and the Effects thereof So you see he takes it away from the outward Blood and gives it to the inward Blood Auditors Go to the next Head G. Keith That is but G. Whitehead's Proof I shall give you W. Penn's Proof Auditors Let us hear it G. Keith I would be loath to mention this Man Is Pennington However this Question is in his Book and I charitably think this Passage dropt from him unawares I wish I could have that ground of Charity to others of them But Truth ought to be more Precious to me than any Man I only mention his Name as to the Subject we are on Jo. Faldo thinks that he has made Is Pennington his own Can outward Blood wash the Conscience p. 29. A plain
Denial says Jo. Faldo Here is Jo. Faldo's Commentary on Is Pennington's words Now see how W. Penn explains Is Pennington's words pag. 149. Is he so impiously Vnjust that because we do deny that outward Blood can be brought into the Conscience to perform that inward work which they themselves dare not nay do not hold therefore Isaac Pennington denies any Efficacy to be in that outward Offering and Blood towards Justification as it respects meer Remission of former Sins and Iniquities So in short I take it thus W. Penn Answers That Is Pennington's words are to be understood with reference to Sanctification but not Justification Says he Outward Blood cannot be brought into the Conscience to perform that work But the way that Blood has been brought into my Conscience is by the application of a living Faith in Christ whose Blood it was the Spirit of God working that Faith in me and that Blood is not a Physical but a Moral once of our cleansing 1 Christ Jesus by his Obedience and Suffering procured the Pardon of my Sins as well as he sealed it by his Blood And 2. He procured the Spirit to Sanctifie me Therefore I agree with all true Christians herein I find none say there must be a material application of that Blood but a Spiritual and Moral and we can give Instances that Moral Causes are many times more effectual Causes than Physical are As the Money wherewithal we buy the Medicine that cures the Body is not the Physical cause of Health but a Moral and the Money that we buy Bread with is not the Physical cause of our Nourishment and Refreshment but a Moral and yet it is so great a cause that without Money neither Bread nor Medicine can be readily obtained and not at all without somewhat equivalent Now I have done with the two first Heads shall I go on to prove the other two or shall we adjourn to another day Auditors If half an hour will do go on G. Keith I know not but it will but that they oft interrupt us with Digressions The Third Head to be prove iâ— That the Body that dieth riseth not again First from W. Penn's holding the Resurrection immediately after Death in his Rejoynder pag. 138. I think this will be enough for W. Penn if I give no more T. Hiâ—ks Argues thus for the Resurrection of the Body That if there be no Resurrection of the Body the Joys of Heaven should else be imperfect Now here is VV. Penn's Answer to it I Answer Is the Joy of the Ancients now in Glory imperfect Or are they in Heaven but by halves If it be so unequitable that the Body which hath suffered should not partake of the Joys Coelestial is it not in measure unequal that the Soul should be rewarded so long before the Body This Principle brings to the Mortality of the Soul held by many Baptists or I am mistaken But why must the Felicity of the Soul depend upon that of the Body Is it not to make the Soul a kind of Widow and so in a state of Mourning and Disconsolateness to be without its beloved Body Which state is but a better sort of Purgatory G. VVhitehead Argues the same way If the deceased Saints in Heaven or their Souls have not all that they expect to all Eternity all the Resurrection they look for then they must be in Purgatory for the time But if the latter be not then not the former But this contradicts many Scriptures that especially in Acts 26. That Christ should suffer and should be the first that should rise from the dead Now according to this Doctrine of VV. Penn and G. VVhitehead Christ's Resurrection was later than that of many Millions Now if you will hear a Proof from G. VVhitehead you may Auditors Yes let us hear it G. Keith Here is the place pag. 353. G. Whitehead 's Christian Quaker Says T. Danson The Happiness of the Soul is not perfect without the Body its dear and beloved Companion the Soul having a strong desire and inclination to a re-union to the Body as the Schools not without ground determine Vide Calv. And here is G. VVhitehead's Answer pag. 353. Both Calvin T. Danson the the Schools and divers Anabaptists are mistaken in this very matter and see not with the Eye of true Faith either that the Happiness of the Soul is not perfect without the Body or that the Soul hath a strong desire to a re-union to the Body while they intend the Terrestrial Elementary Bodies for this implies the Soul to be in a kind of Purgatory or Disquietness till the supposed resumption of the Body You see I hope here is Proof enough that G. VV. holds that the deceased Saints look for no Resurrection of the Body Quaker Elementary Body G. VVhitehead saith Quaker H. Goldney He reads that word faintly G. Keith What other Body could it be The Matter is there is the same Argument of G. VVhitehead and VV. Penn. A little Philosophy I hope will not offend you I hope if they make use of false Philosophy to defend their false Faith I may make use of true Philosophy to defend the true Faith And the Objection they make is the same against Christ's Body Pray was not Christ's Body Elementary Did he not eat and drink And was it not the same as we eat and drink And if we eat and drink of what are Elementary then his Body did receive the same Elements and they were converted into his Body And G. VVhitehead owns in his later Writings that Christ's Body that rose is the same with his Body that suffered but his Pride will not suffer him to own his former Error either in that or in other things And seeing VV. Penn thinks it absurd that a Body can be transformed from an Earthly and Animal Body to an Heavenly Body as he Argueth Reas against Rail p. 134. He makes it not only as gross as Transubstantiation but worse But this is his gross Ignorance in true Philosophy and his false Philosophy destroys his Faith It is not Transubstantiation if I say a Saint's Body is the same at the Resurrection for substance as it was when it went into the Grave leaving the Faeces or drossy part of it behind But if he say Christ hath not the same substance of Body that he had on the Earth this is plain Transubstantiation For have not many that Understanding that a gross body of Herbs or other Substance can by Chymical Operation be made so Subtil Volatile and Spiritual without any Transubstantiation or change of the Substance that a Glass can scarce confine it or hold it Now VV. Penn holds that grossness is so Essential to a Body that a Body must cease to be a bodily Substance if it put off Grossness or Carniety and that Carniety is Essential to a Carnal Body But see how contrary this is to common Sense and Understanding There is no Woman that sets a Hen to breed Chickens
I have a Paper that some persons concerned in this Challenge have sent that they desire may be read Which was consented to G. Keith The truth is I could be almost content to go away and say nothing to it there is so little of value in it They say I began with them but they began with me in Pensylvania I was doing my duty in preaching Christ without and Christ within they charged me with preaching two Christs I went to some of them about it but they took their part against me I laid it before the Ministry at the Yearly meeting they also took their part Now you know he that affirms on him lies the business of proving W. Pen when I was opening a place of Scripture he charges me with being an Apostate and Impostor Here he charges me with being an Apostate I say to him it belongs to make his charge good but he goes away At the Yearly meeting I put it to him to make it good I do not doubt but this meeting will sound through the Nation They urge me to Printing I say again I have not either Estate or Time to print Book upon Book And tho' I have not answer'd the said two Books why may not I say as they do They are not worth answering As for example There is a Book called The Snake in the Grass I would not vindicate all things in it but they have been urged to answer it their Answer is it is not worth answering This man that prints this half-sheet says it cannot be supposed that G. Keith can answer eighteen sheets of Paper in a Meeting Why can it be â—upposed But G. Fox can answer an hundred sheets of Paper in a few Pages He has answer'd Books of ten or twelve sheets in a few lines And as for their upbraiding my Friends for not bearing the charge of Printing my Books they that own me here are not many of them rich and I would not put them to it But now there is the thing the Controversie is whether the rich Church or the poorer Church be the Ch. of Christ G. Keith's is the poor Church and theirs is the rich Church and I am not asham'd of my Poverty seeing I have not done any dishonest thing I have weaken'd my Estate by printing what I have printed already there is a Printer here that can own I have paid near forty pounds to him for Printing Now they upbraid me for my Poverty Their Church is the true Church because the rich Church and ours the false Church because the poor Church Quaker N. Marks You should hear one side but with one Ear and leave the other free for the other side G. Keith I am perswaded the Reasons given in the Paper read at the beginning were no just Reason for their not appearing But though some comparisons are odious yet give me leave to make a comparison May a Malefactor make this excuse You shall not call me before a Justice without my consent If a man rob me I may complain of him as a Robber and without his consent call him to account but here is a strange thing injuring men may not be called to account without their consent it will trespass against the Law and intrenches upon liberty of Conscience I was advised to go before the Lord Mayor of London and I did and told him I hoped it would give no offence to Authority for the things I was concerned in were the common Doctrines of Christianity if there be any Tumult says I it shall not be on my side And the Lord Mayor was pleased to consent to it Now their printed Paper seems to reflect on the publick Authority and not what I have done And thus the Meeting peaceably ended between the second and third hour in the Afternoon Note If any of my Adversaries object That divers of these Proofs here brought were brought formerly in my Book against W. Penn and G. W. call'd A short List of the vile and gross Errors which T. Ellwood hath replied to in his printed Book called Truth defended I answer I know not any one of them that he has sufficiently answer'd unto to give the least Satiâ—faction to any sound Christian his Answers being meerly Evasions and Perversions as I should have shown if he had appear'd But beside there are many new Proofs here brought beside the former which I am well satisfied they can never truly answer but by a sincere and free Confession of their gross Errors and a hearty retracting and relinquishing them And if any that were present at that Meeting or may happen to read this printed Account with the proofs brought out of their Books in full Periods and Paragraphs as often as there was any occasion are desirous to see the Books and to read the Proofs in the said Books that were then brought or any others that may be brought I freely offer them that are sober and impartial persons to let them have the free sight and view of them leisurely to read and consider them if they please to call at my House And I the rather make this Offer because divers of these Books are not easily to be had not being in the hands of many And because I had not time enough to read divers other great Proofs that I had being hinder'd with the impertinent Digressions of those that interposed whom we had no just Cause to hear pretending no Deputation from the persons they spoke for and therefore only were permitted by Favour to shew their Impertinencies I therefore think fit to add some other few very considerable Proofs out of these mens Books and perhaps one or two out of Books approved and commended by them and some few more of W. Penn's and George Whitehead's Self-Contradictions AN APPENDIX CONTAINING Some other Considerable Passages for Proofs out of these Mens Books relating to the foregoing Heads and some few more of W. Penn's and G. Whitehead's Self-Contradictions which were design'd to have been read at the Meeting at Turners-Hall 11th of the Month call'd June 1696. but for the Diversions made could not then be read IN George Whitehead's Book called The Divinity of Christ he hath this most unsound and scandalous passage concerning Christ how a Sacrifice and his Blood In his Answer to T. Danson's Synopsis of Quakerism p. 70. first he sets down the words of John Owen thus The Sacrifice denotes his Human Nature whence God is said to purchase his Church with His own Blood Acts 20.28 for He offer'd Himself through the eternal Spirit there was the Matter of the Sacrifice which was the Human Nature of Christ Soul and Body His Soul was made an Offering for Sin Isa 53.10 His Death had the Nature of a Sacrifice Against these sound words of John Owen he quarrels and contradicts thus Answ These passages are but darkly and confusedly expressâ—d as also we do not read in Scripture that the Blood of God by which he purchas'd his Church is ever call'd