Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	faith_n	justify_v	wrought_v	6,761	5	9.1730	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54015	A modest detection of George Keith's (miscalled) Just vindication of his earnest expostulation published by him as a pretended answer to a late book of mine, entituled, Some brief observations, &c. By E.P.	Penington, Edward, 1667-1701.	1696 (1696)	Wing P1144; ESTC R220367	34,038	60

us from having any share therein as plainly appears from the place referred to though not named by G. Keith viz. A Serious Apology p. 148. Wherein W. Penn reciting an Objection of one Tho. Jenner viz. That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us WHOLLY without us and therefore deny the Lord that bought us He Answers And indeed this we deny c. Now mark the stress of his denial lies upon his Antagonist's Word WHOLLY whereupon W. Penn argues thus No Man can be Justified without Faith says Jenner No Man hath Faith without Works any more than a Body without a Spirit says James Therefore the Works of Righteousness by the Spirit of Christ Jesus are necessary to Justification Observe he doth not say the Works of the Spirit are only necessary thereby excluding the Righteousness which Christ fulfilled in his own Person without us but joins them together the Works wrought without us and the Works wrought within us and calls that Doctrine which would divide them and Attribute all wholly to the outward A Doctrine of Devils which to manifest the more clearly and thereby the more fully to detect G. Keith's Injustice and Falshood I shall give the Reader another Quotation out of the very next Page of the same Book where explaining our Faith concerning the Father Son and Holy Spirit in that part relating to the Son he saith Who took upon him Flesh and was in the World and in Life Doctrine Miracles Death Resurrection Ascension and Mediation perfectly did and does continue to do the Will of God to whose Holy Life Power Mediation and Blood we only ascribe our Sanctification JUSTIFICATION Redemption and perfect Salvation But besides G. Keith his abusing and misrepresenting W. Penn in the above-mentioned Passage I have another Remark to make upon him and that is That the very same Doctrine which W. Penn in his aforenamed Serious Apology called a Doctrine of Devils in T. Jenner G. Keith in his Postscript to the Nature of Christianity calls corrupt Doctrine in R. Gordon see p. 70. of the said Book The Title of that Part is Some of Robert Gordon 's corrupt Doctrines and p. 71. the eighth Head is That Redemption Justification were finished and compleated in the Crucified Body in Christ for us not in our Persons And the twelfth Head viz. That Redemption c. and all things are wrought purchased c. for us without the help of any thing to be wrought in us Now if these are corrupt Doctrines with G. Keith now which were so it seems with him in 1671. the Time of the Date of that Book is he not insincere in a high Degree in quarrelling with W. Penn for opposing the very same Doctrine in the very same Year his Serious Apology being likewise Printed in 1671. And on the other Hand if these Doctrines be not corrupt according to his Opinion and Judgment at this Time then doth he give himself the lye in this very Paper of his now before me p. 4 and 5. wherein he expresseth himself thus But whereas they upbraid me again and again with contradicting my former Doctrines and Principles as to Articles of Faith I cannot find that they have proved it against me in one Particular Of which more anon Well to conclude this Matter I shall tell him yet farther that I know not of any Quakers who do not ascribe Remission of Sins to that one Offering upon the Cross through Faith in the Name of Jesus Christ but if I understand any thing of the Quakers Principles as I think I do that is one of them and to prove that I speak not by Rote I will produce another Author approved amongst them viz. my Father Isaac Penington to confirm what I say as the Reader may see in his Treatise Entituled The Flesh and Blood of Christ c. p. 16. and of his Works Part 2. p. 186. It was a spotless Sacrifice of great Value and Effectual for the Remission of Sins And I do acknowledge humbly unto the Lord THE REMISSION OF MY SINS THEREBY and bless the Lord for it even for giving up his Son to Death for us all and giving all that believe in his Name and Power to partake of Remission through him In my Brief Observations p. 8. I produced a Proof out of A brief Narrative of the second Meeting c of his Self-contradiction in then saying The whole Protestant cause lieth at stake in the Defence whereof we with all true Protestants are concerned against the Jesuites and Baptists And yet in his Expostulation We promote vile Errours worse than the worst of Popery This he shuffles off saying p. 4. In vain are all his shuffling Aggravations against me upbraiding me with my being changed in my Opinion of what these Quakers were and a little lower I own it they deceived me they were the Deceivers and I was the Deceived Answ Any intelligent Reader may perceive it was Principles and not Persons he vindicated the Cause not Parties he then espoused therefore this is only a Sophistical turn to serve a turn and his Pretences to knowing them better only a false gloss that he may abuse them the worse and the Cause of their Changing their Opinion of him is his changing Sides and now taking up the Baptists old Arguments against his quondam Friends which he once assisted them in Baffling and now wou'd insinuate a mistake in the Men and not in the Principles to hold up his Credit of not being changed whereas the Men are the same their Principles the same now he opposes them as they were when he Vindicated them and he is the Man that is Changed Deviated Apostatized and therefore an ill Man which hath been over and over proved upon him and not disproved by him any other way than by a bare denial without Demonstration and so any farther Proof at present needless Yet to shew the Reader his former Judgment of our Principles both as Consonant with Scripture and also with those of the first Reformers so far as theirs agreed with Scripture I shall add a Quotation out of Help in Time of Need p. 46. viz. And now ye who accuse us in Derision called Quakers by you as Apostates and that we have denied our Fore-fathers Faith try your selves and Paralel your Fathers Principles and Practices with your own and also with ours and ye shall find ye are degenerated from them exceedingly as we were while with you but through the Grace of God are we recovered and brought to witness the Spirit and Life of the Primitive Protestants and Christians and ye cannot Instance to us one Particular wherein we Dissent from them warranted from the very Letter of the Scripture The Second Head viz. His Reflections upon the Protestant Clergy as more Lukewarm if they oppose not the Quakers here than the Popish Clergy at Rome would be in such a case He saith Hath nothing in it worth noticing but their

will look more like a Gang than the other for by T. Crisp's own concession if he say true those Influenced by W. Penn may pass for the main Body I will next examine his second particular and see whether they be not both of a piece which is 2. That he makes me represent them I so charge absolutely worse then Papists when as I cautioned my words thus Vile Errors not only as bad as any Popery but much worse then the worst of Popery in divers respects Observe in divers respects I said not absolutely and in all respects but in divers respects Answ Very well I 'le allow him his full Scope he did not say absolutely in all respects neither did I mention all matters in respect of which the Papists differ from the Quakers but saies he in divers respects so I quoted him What wrong have I done him Wherein am I guilty of the gross Vntruth and Falshood he charges upon me For my part I can see none This he tells us he can easily prove and in proof thereof goes about to answer one of my Queries viz. Do we promote Errours worse then worshipping a piece of Bread as God He replies I say that 's a Transition from the Subject of the Controversie betwixt them and me to another forreign Subject viz. Transubstantiation Answ He chargeth this Gang of Quakers as he calls them with promoting Errours not only as bad as any Popery but much worse then the worst of Popery in divers respects Now I am ready to think that most Protestants will agree with me that Transubstantiation Adoration of Images Praying to Saints and Angels meritorious Works and Purgatory are not only Popery that is Principles wherein Protestants dissent from Papists but some of the worst of Popery Now my Queries were Do we promote Errours worse than c. mentioning all these former Heads at large denying his charge as not yet proved Therefore wherein he can prove this a Transition and Transubstantiation another foreign Subject unless he will be so kind to the Papist's darling Sacrament as not to Rank it amongst the worst of Popery or indeed allow it to be any Popery at all I see not He proceeds It seems this bold Novice has not learned the Maxim Words are to be understood according to the Subject matter If I say this is not one of these respects wherein I have charged them this Junior Sophister is at a Nonplus Answ Hold a little George not so fast If Transubstantiation say I be any part of the worst of Popery then thou must shew in what respects the Quakers hold Errours not only as bad but much worse than it and this I take to be according to the Subject matter call me what thou pleasest In short G. Keith saith Our Principles are much worse than the worst of Popery in divers respects and he is offended with me for taking him at his Word who so seldom holds to it and reciting the worst of the Papists Principles as if foreign from the matter Surely Transubstantiation is none of the best If he thinks 't is let him apply himself in the next place to them and see if they will trust him and be at his beck as he would have the Pious and Learned among the Protestants be Well in further Vindication of his aforesaid Affertion he refers to his Narrative telling us He has clearly proved that G. Whitehead has destroyed the true Object of the Christian Faith and Worship c. All which are so far from being clearly proved by him that his pretended Proofs are clearly disproved by T. Ellwood in his answer thereto which unless he had replied to he might be ashamed to entitle the matters contained in his Narrative by so wrong a name Yet upon the Foot of the aforesaid lame Objections he utters many foul Reproaches against us not worth the notice and what is worse I am satisfied writes what he knows to be false in his Vilifying the Light the Quakers Preach and direct People to as if that led them to Vilifie and Reproach the Man Christ Jesus without them Therefore his Insinuation that the Quakers Worship the Devil within thereby to prove them worse than the Papists who he grants Worship a piece of Bread without is wholly Proofless Groundless envious in the highest degree and such a Slander as he might well be ashamed to Impose upon the World But to what a degree of hardness must this Man be come who can tax us with adoring a false Christ within and setting up a false Notion of Light within upon no other Foundation but Misconstruction and Wresting of Sentences pickt out of Books whereon he erects his Fabrick of Slanders and false Accusations of his own Inventing not without knowledge but contrary to his own certain knowledge He says He is sorry we give him this Occasion to detect us Alas Poor Man he discovers himself and hurts not us the more he takes such Work in hand he does but encrease his Burthen whilst we being safe in the Sanctuary of our own Innocency can appeal to the Searcher of all Hearts concerning the Falshood of his Malicious Charges and commit our Cause to Him who in due time will ease us of this troublesom Detractor as he hath already of many of his Predecessors He slips over the rest of my Queries saving that about Merits and to that he says I am sure most Papists are more sound then some of them Answ That 's more than he can be sure of Is he acquainted with most Papists Yet however it comes to pass he is a little more modest than usual than some of them says he But let us hear wherein some of them are less sound in this particular than most Papists viz. Whereas Papists generally profess highly to value Christs Merits and own their first Justification to the Merits of Christ's Obedience and Righteousness without them W. Penn hath called this Doctrine A Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption deluging the whole World Answ His Charge against W. Penn I did intend to have passed over as defective because he mentions neither Page nor Book a way of Managing Controversie unbecoming a Schollar neither for some time did I know where to find the Passage he carps at but having at length received Information where I might meet with it accordingly I had recourse to the Book from whence he produceth it and there find that G. Keith hath much abused and misrepresented W. Penn For whereas he states the Case as if Christ's Merits and the owning Men's first Justification to the Merit of Christ's Obedience and Righteousness without them was by W. Penn called A Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption deluging the whole World He therein mistates the Case for the Doctrine which he so called was the attributing Justification wholly to the Works wrought by Christ without us so as thereby to exclude the works wrought by the Spirit in