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 undâ—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 phantâ—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 Incendiâ—ries to mischief and the best to be spared of Mankind against whom the boiling Vengeance of an irritated God is reaâ—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
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
false Accusation and Defamation and I offer to prove it at the said Meeting Fifthly Whereas the Second Days Weekly Meeting of the People called Quakers in Lombard-street London hath approved or Countenanced the above-mentioned Scandalous Books and another late Book from Pensilvania signed by Caleb Pusey falsly called by him A modest Account from Pensilvania of the Principal Differences in a Point of Doctrine c. I charge them to be guilty of great Injustice against me as also of being guilty of the false Accusations Perversions Forgeries and false Doctrines contained in the said Books by their approving the same and allowing them to be publickly sold next Door to their Meeting-place by one of their own Profession If it happen that few or none of the above-mentioned Persons shall be present at the said Meeting being conscious to themselves of the badness of their Cause yet I do hereby declare and publish my full intention to be present God willing with my Friends at the said Place and Time appointed to make good the Charges against them And any moderate and Friendly People of other Professions have freedom to be present so far as there is room in the place to receive them without Crowd or Throng to hear what shall be said and proved in these matters above-mentioned GEORGE KEITH London the 11th day of the Third Month called May 1696. And here I think fit to give a true Account of the Just Cause I have to intimate such a Meeting IN my book called A Seasonable Information and Caveat against a scandalous book of Th. Elwood I made a profer to Th. Elwood to meet him at any Place and Time that he would appoint to prove him guilty of gross Forgery in matters of Fact c. and also of false Doctrine But he did no wise assent to any such proffer nor gave any rational Excuse for his Rufusal pretending he would not give G K. an Opportunity to gratifie the Rabble and disgrace his Profession he yet made of Truth by so publick a discovery of his ungoverned Passions What is this but great hypocrisie And no doubt if he or his Party thought to get any advantage against me such a Publick Appearance either in regard of the Cause or of what he and they call my ungoverned Passions they would greedily embrace it But the reality of the matter is they are not willing their great injustice as well as their insolent carriage and most unruly Passions in clandestine places should be discovered shutting the doors upon all but themselves that none that were equal and impartial Hearers and Observers might be present to be a check to their rude and insolent carriage against me many speaking to me at once which some among themselves reproved at the first Yearly Meeting I appeared among them Thus they seek to murther the Reputation of the Innocent in secret places And instead of assenting to my just proffer he prints another book against me filled with more than double to what was in his former book of Forgeries Perversions False Accusations and Misrepresentations And I having neither time nor ability of outward Estate to print Answers to him and others that heap book upon book against me with no charge to them they having got a way without any charge or cost to them to Print what they please And things being thus I appeal to all moderate persons whether this my intimation of such a Meeting in the defence of the Fundamental Doctrines of Christianity as the necessity of Faith in Christ as he outwardly suffered at Jerusalem to our Salvation Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed the Resurrection of the Body that dyeth and Christs coming without us in his Glorified Body even the same that formerly suffered Death for our sins to Judge the Quick and the Dead All which I offer to prove have been opposed and contradicted by some of them being the common Faith generally and in common professed by Christians in all professions and for the defence of which all sincere Christians are jointly concerned and also in my just vindication both as a man and a Christian be not justifiable and commendable it being the best way I have at present to clear the Truth and my Innocency and discover their great injustice towards me and to Answer the proud and insulting boastings of my Adversaries And whereas in my late Book called A short List of some of the vile and gross Errors of Geo. Whitehead c. I proposed a just demand to William Penn to give me an Opportunity for him to make good his Charge against me at any publick Meeting of the People called Quakers in or about London instead of his assenting to my just Demand there comes forth a Third Book of Tho. Elwood multiplying his gross Forgeries Defamations and Misrepresentations against me and also containing most false and Antichristian Doctrine to the great dishonour of the blessed Name of Christ and the Christian Religion And as if G. W. and W. P. were not alive or not able to Answer for themselves he will needs Answer for them and the said Tho. Elwood puts a most impudent and notorious perversion upon my plain words in my Proposition to W. Penn saying of me as he has worded his Demand he seems to have bespoke a Publick Meeting that he might have done it himself see page 159. and page 160. of his Truth defended As if saith he he wanted such an Opportunity to prove himself an Apostate Let the Reader but read my words in my own Book and at the first sight he will see the Cheat and Forgery Observe Reader my words p. 32. And let him signifie to me the time and place where he will make it to appear I say not when I will that his Charge against me is true May I not well say that ever such a gross and impudent Forgerer Wrester and Perverter of a Mans words should be allowed or permitted to be an Agent Patron or Champion for what they call the Body of the People named Quakers and their Ministry is a sign that they are at a low Ebb when they make use of such Tools as T. E. is whom I can and do offer to prove not only to be guilty of gross Forgeries and Perversions and Antichristian Principles but grosly ignorant in that which he pretends to have knowledge of Humane Learning and who is guilty of Pedantick trifling and quibbling from meer Errors of the Press not so duly corrected yet obvious to any intelligent Reader And to my demanding the like Justice to be done me as some Years ago we demanded of the Baptists against Thomas Hicks he answereth in his last book falsly called Truth defended pag. 158. That betwixt that and this of mine there is in parallel For saith he in that there was a people concerned on each side c. Whereas W. P 's calling G. K. Apostate affects no body that I know of saith T. E. but himself and
two Twelve months But if J. Faldo speak Truth against my Father I must defend him against my Father Hear what J. Faldo says p. 100 101. For Christ to be in the Gentiles rightly understood would be no hard Matter for the Gentiles to believe as to believe such a Glory to be attain'd by Faith in and Obedience to the Laws of a Man who died as a Malefactor and that this Death of his should reconcile God to Man with the Addition of such a Purchase To this W. Penn answereth This sort of Doctrine will becometh John Faldo I perceive I have not mistaken him What Carnalist in the World could have let drop a more perricious Sentence to the Doctrine and Kingdom of Christ than to render it more difficult to believe and lay a greater stress upon the external than the internal Work of Christ we must read the most weighty Scriptures backwards upon this Man's Principles he hath helped us to a new way of rendring the Text not this Mystery among the Gentiles is Christ in you the Hope of Glory but this Mystery among the Gâ—nâ—ilâ—s is a Man who died as a Malefactor by his Death reconciled to God c. Behold your Expositor I dare warrant this Man's Comment will never trouble the next Collection of Criticks At this rate the Lord Lord Criar is highly privileged and the Galatians had passed the most difficult Birth before they had known Christ to be formed in them Regeneration is a slight thing in comparison of the Knowledg of Christ after the Flesh This Doctrine brings not Men to Christ in them the Hope of Glory but inticeth them into the vain Hope of the Hypocrisy which perisheth the History is made the greatest Mystery and to believe the one matter of greater Difficulty than to experience the other 'T is strange that should be reputed most mysterious which was the Introduction to the Mystery and those Transactions counted most difficult that were by the Divine Wisdom of God ordained as so many facile Representations of what was to be accomplished in Man In short it is to lessen if not totally to exclude the true Mystery of Godliness which is Christ manifested in his Children their Hope of Glory We had wont to say All other Professions denied Christ within but here J. Faldo owns Christ to be in the Gentiles rightly understood But to me Christ crucified in whom the Fulness dwell th is a greater Mystery and a greater Matter to be believed I can shew many of the Philosophers that owned the Light within under the Denomination of the Word Light Spirit c. yet it was so hard for them to believe that a Man that was crucified as a Malefactor should die for their Sins Yea Julian the Apostate and Porphirius professed and owned a Divine Principle within as generally the Platonist Philosophers did and Aristotle also but Christ crucified they could not away with And now it is a Stumbling-block to these Quakers This sort of Doctrine well becomes J. Faldo See how he hanters him W. Penn thinks it is a Matter of little or no Difficulty to believe God sent Christ to die for Sinners and to reconcile God to Men by his Death But Christ told the Jews This is the Work of God John 6.29 that ye believe on him whom he hath sent And surely that was the Man Christ Jesus And he said also No Man can come unto me exâ—ept the Father which hath sent me draw him John 6.44 And every one that has heard and learned â—f the Father comes to me ver 45. Now to come to him is the same as to believe in him with a true saving Faith So that it is plain he teaches the Jews that they cannot believe in Christ that appearâ—d outwardly among them whom God has sent but as they are taught of God and drawn of him And yet W. Penn makes it inseriour to Regâ—neration as you may see by his Words Whereas true saving Faith in Christ crucified who died as a Malefactor to reconcile us to God is a great and principal Part of Regeneration and is as great a Work of God as to make us believe Christ's inward Appearance in us But says William Penn Behold your Expositor I dare warrant this Man's Comment will never trouble the next Collection of Criticks c. A rare way to refute him to banter him at this rate Now I will give you my Sense I do not reckon J. Faldo was so ignorant a Man that he believed a Man could be a Christian only with a traditional Knowledg or Faith of Christ without him But tho Regeneration is no slight thing yet I say comparing Christ's Incarnation that is a Complex of Mysteries a certain Writer shews a Complex of twenty and more Mysteries in that one Mystery of Christ's Incarnation I say comparing that with the Work of Regeneration I do affirm the Work of Regeneration is a light thing tho not light in it self Therefore this of W. Penn is but a mere Banter There is none of all the Church-of England-men or Independents or Presbyterians say the mere historical literal traditional Faith of Christ will save any But the Matter is there is a saving Faith of Christ without us and Christ without us as he is both God and Man the Emanuel as well as his inward Appearance in us is the Object of saving Faith but these Men would not own it I desire you well to mark and consider the several Passages in this whole Paragraph of William Penn's Rejoinder what gross and absurd things it contains He saith This Doctrine brings not Men to Christ in them the Hope of Glory but inticeth them into the vain Hope of the Hypocrite which perisheth Yea see how he makes it the vain Hope of the Hypocrite to believe that Christ without is a greater Mystery than Christ within that 's History this is Mystery according to him Now I have some other principal Proofs yet remaining about this gross Error of W. Penn. I shall read to you in his Christian Quaker a Passage p 97 98. printed Anno 1674. but the Printer's Name is not to it To conclude as Abraham outward and natural was the great Father of the Jews whose Seed God promised to bless with Earthly Blessings as Canaan c. and that they were figurative of the one Seed Christ and such as he should beget unto a lively Hope through the Power of his Spiritual Resurrection it will consequently follow that this Seed must be inward and spiritual since one outward thing cannot be the proper Figure or Representation of another nor is it the way of holy Scripture so to teach us The outward Lamb shews forth the inward Lamb the Jew outward the Jew inward As God attended the one with many singuâ—ar outward Mercies to say no more above other Nations so the Jew in Spirit doth he benefit above all other People I have these two short Arguments to prove what I believe and assert as
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
is no diference between them and me I will cite a passage or two out of a Manuscript from Pensilvania it is a thing that will satisfy your Consciences as much as any thing I brought the Manuscripts they were read at the yearly Meeting at London 1694. and something was objected to the hand and it was asked at Samuel Jennings my Adversary whether it was the hand of that man and he said he believed it was and you will find it is matter of Doctrine at the bottom for which they have Excommunicated me however they would cloak it Let them retract their Errors and I will forgive them my Excommunication See the Book called Light and Life pag. 41. See what is here said by G. Whitehead That there is not an outward coming of Christ to Judg the Quick and Dead What I prove from G. Whitehead is proved from W. Penn for W. Penn has Authorized his Book therefore it is the proof of them both Here is the place Moreover Christ said The Son of Man shall come in the Glory of his Father with his Angels c. Matt. 16.27 28. Luke 9.26 27 Now what is that Glory of the Father in which his coming is is it visible to the Carnal Eye And when was that coming to be Is it now to be looked for outwardly But farther we do acknowledg the several comings of Christ according to the Scriptures both that in the Flesh and that in the Spirit which is manifest in several degrees as there is a growing from Glory to Glory But three comings of Christ not only that in the Flesh at Jerusalem and that in the Spirit but also another coming in the Flesh yet to be expected we do not read of but a second coming without sin unto Salvation which in the Apostles days was looked for And as concerning that noted place 1 Thes 4.17 brougt by W. B. to prove Christs coming without us to judgment G. W. denyeth it to be meant of his Personal coming and useth a Sophism to contradict it and wrest it to his inward coming whereas all the stress of his Sophism lies in that We We that remain but the true Sense of these words is those Saints those Believers that shall be living at that day shall not prevent them that dyed in Christ before It is an enallage personae frequent in Scripture putting we for they live that or James therewith bless we God and Curse men Now all these proofs he has Allegorized to Christ within he has allegorized away his Birth his Death Resurrection and Ascension and coming to Judgment and so we have nothing from Scripture to prove Christ's Death to be of any benefit to us and we have no Argument to prove he came in the Flesh And so all the proofs against Jews and Philosophers he has Allegorized away Thus you have had a proof from G. Whitehead and W. Penn. Now if you will adjourn the Meeting to some other time or continue it a while longer I am content And I hope I have proved that I am not Petulant and that I have had just cause to accuse them of these Errors I was presented by a Grand jury at Philadelgpia and the Presentment would have been Prosecuted if the Government had not been changed and I had been accused for endeavouring to alter the Government which is Capital by their Law and they would have found me guilty of Death had they not been turned out of the Government tho I was innocent And when I objected against the Jury they would not suffer one of the Jury to be cast Now it I had been guilty of any Trespass and Offence against K. William and Q. Mary the King is alive and God bless him do you think that Governour Fletcher put into the Government by King William and Queen Mary that was the Governor there if he had found me guilty of High Treason he would have passed me but he ordered them to let fall the Indictment Then the Company desired G. Keith to proceed if he had any more proofs against G. Whitehead G. Keith Yes I have Says G. Whitehead to R. Gordon Dost thou look for Christ's coming again to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence If thou dost thou mayest look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him Now see how G. Whitehead has excused this he says He did not mean it of Christ's coming to Judgment but he meant it thus because R. Gordon would needs have it that Salvation was delayed till Christ's outward coming I am apt to think he abuses R. Gordon not that I would vindicate R. Gordon in every thing for I think he did overcharge the Quakers in some things at that time but now I do not accuse or acquit him But I say he says he only opposed that false Notion of R. Gordon as if the Saints remained under their Pollution till the Resurrection from the Dead Can you think so He was a Protestant and no Protestant will say any such thing We say we are saved by hope I say in a Scripture sense we may expect that great Salvation then even from all charge of Sin tho not from any stain of Sin Not that the sense of Pardon is not made manifest before that day but that in that day all that have Repented and Believed he will clear them before God Angels and Men. The Devil will be ready to accuse them in that day but Christ will then clear them It will be a great solemn Assize and there will be a solemn Acquitment to all that have sincere Repented of their sins and believed in the Lord Jesus Christ Quaker Let the passage be read out G. Keith If we had not had these oppositions we might have saved an Hour I will read the passage Dost thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou doest thou mayest look until thy Eyes drop out befor thou will see such an appearance of him Ye see these are plain and express words agianst Christ's outward coming The Scripture saith we are saved by hope and hope that is seen is not hope our great Salvation in the full accomplishment of it is at the Resurrection and Christs last coming then will be the great Discharge and Acquitment according to 2 Tim. 1.18 and 2 Tim. 4.16 The Lord grant that we may find mercy in that day and that our sins may not be laid to our charge And Acts 3.19 it is said Repent and be Converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshment shall come c. The word is very well Translated when the times of Reanimation shall come the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quaker I desire to be heard a word G. Keith I have not done yet I beg of you I shall be but short I had said I had upward of six Manuscripts What
William Penn has blamed that in another unjustly which most unjustly he justifies in himself and in his Tyrannical Brethren of his Party who for no other cause did excommunicate me but for not obeying their most unjust and unreasonable demand which was To clear the Body of the People called Quakers and their Ministry from some of the Errors charged upon them in Pensilvania which as I at that very Meeting told them I could prove some of them were guilty of and which I have since effectually done And that William Penn thinks it was such a notable Argumentum ad hominem that Rob. Norwood used to them who did excommunicate him Are none the People of God but your selves Have not I the same Argumentum ad hominem against them that excommunicated me who in their Nameless Bull of Excommunication given out against me at the Yearly Meeting at London 1695. call themselves the Church of Christ from which they say I have separated my self And because I could not obey their most unjust and unreasonable Demand they pass this Judgment against me as if they were the only Church of Christ and in their Yearly Epistle this very year 1696. directed to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings in England Wales and elsewhere they call themselves to wit those that generally go under the Name Quakors professing Unity with them God's whole Heritage and People this agreeth with Solomon Eccles Paper called The Quakers Challenge p. 2 3. 1668. The Quakers are in Truth and none but they The Tabernacle of God is with you and his Dwelling Place is among you and only among you is God known said Edw. Burrough to the Quakers see his Works page 64. 2. In the same Rejoinder page 310. he hath a Passage that is either perfect Nonsense or Antichristian Doctrine or rather indeed both I shall cite it verbatim Seventhly Because that Flesh of Christ is called a Vail but he himself is within the Vail which is the Holy of Holiest whereinto Christ Jesus our High-Priest hath entred Heb. 10.20 21. And as he descended into and past through a suffering-state in his fleshly appearance and returned into that state of Immortality and Eternal Life and Glory from whence he humbled himself which was and is the Holy of Holiest then obscured or hid by his Flesh or Body the Vail while in the world so must all know a death to their fleshly ways and Religions yea their knowledge of Christ himself after the flesh or they stick in the Vail and never enter into the Holy of Holies nor come to know him in any spiritual relation as their High and Holy Priest that abides therein Annot. I shall make no large Commentary on these words only in short note 1. His saying Christ has entred into the Holy of Holies within the Vail and that Vail is his Flesh and that Holy of Holies is himself What Nonsense is this Was not Christ always in himself 2. His entring in within the Vail of his Flesh is either perfect Nonsense or it hath this sense That he hath put off his Body he had on earth and is separated from it as one Robert Young a Preacher among the Quakers in Pensilvania at a Meeting affirmed and brought these very words of W. Penn's to confirm it That Christ hath entred within the Vail and Christ's flesh is that Vail whereas it is plain and generally understood by all Christians That the Vail within which Christ is entred according to Heb. 6.19 is not his flesh though elsewhere but in another respect his flesh is called a Vail the word Vail having divers significations in Scripture 3. That he saith That all must know a death to their knowledge of Christ after the flesh it is plain from his words that he hath this unsound sense of it That they must know a death to the knowledge of Christ after the flesh as that flesh signifieth the flesh of Christ as he came in the flesh But this is a perversion of Paul's words as if Paul had rejected the knowledge of Christ as he came and suffered in the flesh as inconsistent with the revelation of Christ in himself which are so consistent that as none have the saving knowledge of Christ as he came and suffered in the flesh without the inward revelation of him in their hearts so none have that inward revelation of him sufficient to Eternal Salvation but who by that inward revelation know and believe that he came and suffered in the flesh and that he is now in Heaven in the same Body that suffered the same I say as to Substance though wonderfully changed in Mannâ—r and Condition 3. W P. in a Book he calleth Truth exalted presented to Princes Priests and People reprinted Anno 1671. he giveth a large description of the Quakers Christ as he calleth him pag. 13 14. without mentioning in the least his Birth in the flesh Death Resurrection Ascension as the Son of Man or the Son of Abraham and David and wholly applying that Isaiah 9.6 7. Unto us a child is born and Deut. â—1 18 A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to the Inward Principle of the Light in all men and thus he describeth the Quakers Christ pag. 14. This is the second Adam the quickening Spirit the Lord from Heaven the new and spiritual man the Heavenly Bread the true Vine the Flesh and Blood that was given for the Life of the World the second Covenant the Law writ in the Heart and Spirit put in the inward parts the way in which the fool cannot err the Truth before Deceit was the Life that 's hid in God eternal in the Heavens glorified before the world began the Power the Wisdom the Righteousness of God the Plant of Renown the Royal Seed that bruiseth the Serpent's head in short that Grace which hath appeared unto all men teaching them to deny Ungodliness c. Annot. By this it is plain he makes nothing of Christ but an inward Principle in all men which yet falsly he calls the second Covenant the Law written in the heart for the Law writ in the heart that is the second Covenant is not in any Unbelievers but only in the hearts of True Believers Again in his large description of the Christian Quaker filling Three Pages of his Folio called the Christian Quaker he mentions not one word of Christ as he was born of the Virgin suffered death for our sins rose again c. as the Object of Faith Hope or Love or Christian Devotion see his Pages 125 126 127. By which it plainly appears that he and G Whithead and many other Teachers among the Quakers have no other Notion of Christ but an Inward Principle which is manifestly contrary to the Gospel preached by the Holy Prophets Evangelists and Apostles who preached Christ chiefly without men as both God and Man and consequentially his Light and Grace and Spirit within men I shall now point at some of W. Penn's most gross and
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 Minâ—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 alwaâ—s to God by the 〈◊〉 â—or the Man Christ Jesus they said They could come to God withâ—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
Keith See this little man's passion now what is he but a Creature and a contentious Creature I contend for Truth he and they against it I will not name them without their consent only bid this angry man Henry Goldney be silent and I will read their Paper containing their Censure against T. Ellwood in divers particulars The true Copy of a Paper containing a Censure and Judgment of a Meeting of Friends owned by Tho. Ellwood's Brethren to be in Vnity with them and generally in good Repute among them held at London the 12th Month 1694 in divers weighty particulars IN Thomas Ellwood 's Book entituled A further Discovery c. pag. 31 Thomas Ellwood blames G. K. for mistating the Controversie and cunningly sliding in the word Within when he knew it was not in the words charged nor in the words proved A true Copy of the three Judgments p. 6. are these words All which are something else than the People called Quakers understand by the Light to wit the light in every man's Conscience which G. K. alledgeth is Proof that G. K. intended the Light within In Benjamin Chambers Letter dated Philadelphia the 24 th of the fourth Month 1693. one of the four credible Evidences against G. K. are these words following The substance of what Tho. Fâ—tzwâ—ters had said to wit that according to his own Apprehension of thee thou didst not believe the Light of Christ within Man is sufficient for Salvation without something else To which words thee didst then in the audience of the Meeting forthwith reply No more I do not without something else In John Delaval 's Letter dated the 24th of the 10th Month 1692. are these words cited out of G. W. 's Book That the Light which is sufficient to convince of Sin and leads out of it is sufficient to guide unto Salvation but such is the Light of Christ in every man John Humphry's Two Letters read and both to the same purpose T. E. Further Discovery c. pag. 101. are these words And this makes a Verbal Confession yea a bare Verbal Confession sufficient to yoke them as he phrases it together in Church-Fellowship Reasons and Causes of the Separation pag. 22. ad finem Tho. Elwood leaves this out viz. Touching these necessary and fundamental Principles of Christian Doctrine as well as that their Conversation is such as becomes the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ Pag. 36. That the Church of Christ is the multitude of sincere Believers in Christ who ought to manifest their Faith to one another by the living confession of the Mouth flowing from the living Faith in the Heart accompanied with the seal and confirmation of a Holy and Christian life and conversation Pag. 103. Tho. Ellwood accuseth G. K. for giving of false Quotation or forging Quotation out of Robert Barkly's Book G. K's Quotation compared with Robert Barkly's agrees as quoted Reasons and Causes c. pag. 16. for Substance of Doctrine pag. 24 25 26. in express words pag. 106. T. E. admits of Substance Further Discovery p. 19. Tho. Ellwood accuseth G. K. that he blames Friends that they were gone too much from the outward to the inward But G. K. p. 20. which Tho. Ellwood brings for Proof saith That he blames some persons for not rightly and fully preaching Christ without so that Tho. Ellwood's consequences seems not fair but strain'd Pag. 22. Tho. Ellwood accuseth George Keith of a Fallacy in declaring he refused not to go forth at the Yearly Meeting which Fallacy alledged was That G. K. should refuse to go out some one day of the yearly meeting but that not appearing to us by any Quotation the supposed Fallacy appears not And further whereas Tho. Elwood alledges thaâ— he was led into this Mistake by G. K's obscure way of writing for altho' in pag. 14. nor 18. of the Book Reasons and Causes as Tho. Ellwood unduly argueth yet in pag. 3. Plea of the Innocent quoted by himself pag 19 of his first Book called an Epistle c. we find G. K. gives account the Yearly Meeting at Philadelphia was in the first week of the 7th month 1691. Further Discovery p. 26 Tho. Ellwood saith G. K. asks why they contradicted the sound Judgment of a Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia passing due Censure upon W. S. sixth month thereafter and saith It doth not sound as if it came from a sound Judgment as if a Judgment now were capable of contradicting a Judgment that should be given six months after whereas it appears by the date of the Judgment given by the publick Friends to be nine months after the Yearly Meeting the first being as above the 1 st of the seventh month 91 the other bearing date the 4 th of the fourth month 92 The which Book Tho. Ellwood being so conversant in looks as if he could not be ignorant of the adjourned Meeting being six months after the Yearly Meeting to wit the 27 th of the twelfth month as appears in pag. 10. Reasons and Causes and that wherein the supposed Judgment of the Yearly Meeting is is dated nine months after the Yearly Meeting In the same Book pag. 35. Tho. Ellwood alledgeth That he no where gave that as the only or any Reason why the Meeting could not adjourn to wit because the Book and Clark was gone Pag. 36 37. he adds Let G. K. clear himself fairly of this if he can till then I shall take it for certain that that Monthly Meeting was ended and broken up part of the Friends gone away the Clerk gone the Book in which the Proceedings of the Meeting should be recorded gone before the adjournment was made and consequently that Adjournment not good but invalid Ditto pag. 42 43. Whereas Tho. Ellwood should have brought matter of Fact to prove G. K. guilty of the Separation instead thereof he argues as we think unfairly by logical Nicety Pag. 42. he blameth G. K. greatly for not putting the Printer's name to some of his Books But it 's well known this hath been the frequent practice of the People called Quakers not to put the Printer's name to their Books in times of suffering Pag. 91. Tho. Ellwood alledges he did not understand that the Doctrine of the Faith of Christ as he died being necessary to our Christianity and Salvation c. was by him reputed a Doctrine in Controversie between G. K. and others in America when in several places of his Books it plainly appears it was the principal Doctrine in Controversie See Reasons and Causes pag. 8 21 22. with many others G. Keith The Paper is read the Question was not concerning the Light indefinitely but whether the Light within was sufficient to Salvation without the Man Christ and his Death c. Thomas Ellwood accuseth me unjustly That I cunningly slid in the word Light within as if that were not the state of the Question but Light indefinitely comprehending Christ both Light without and within But
ye see how the citations they bring in their Paper clear me and shew T. Ellwood his injustice against me You see there is the Light within not the Light without in the Citations they have brought to clear me and to blame T. Ellwood And here is another thing they find fault with as to T. Ellwood's wronging me as if I had made a meer Verbal Confession a sufficient qualification to a Member of the Church of Christ See here they cite my Book Reasons and Causes p. 22. Take notice how they notifie his Forgery that he leaves out my words T. Ellwood says I make a meer Verbal Confession a Qualification for being a Member of the Church But I say not so as if a Verbal Confession were enough but as well a Conversation such as becomes the Gospel is necessary to qualifie a Member So my Book is Such a Conversation as becomes the Gospel p. 36. Reasons and Causes c. I appeal to you is not this more than a Verbal Confession T. Ellwood charges me to say That a meer Verbal Confession is enough to make a man a Member of the Church of Christ Now p. 103 T. Ellwood accuseth me unjustly as his own Brethren do observe for giving a false Quotation out of R. Barclay's Book called the Anarchy c. but they cleaâ— me and declare it to be true as it is T. Ellwood quibbles about Substance finding fault with my Saying Somewhere it agrees in Substance with R. B. as elsewhere in express words Now these men take notice that T. Ellwood is unfair in taking that liberty to himself he will not allow to me They observe he admits of Substance of Doctrine in his own Citations but will not allow it to me Another thing T. Ellwood accuses G. Keith as they observe in their Censure that he blames them for going too much from the outward to the inward But these are not my words nor sence And they censure T. Ellwood for making a strained Consequence on my words for tho' I blamed them for not rightly preaching Christ withouâ— yet not for going to the inward Light for if they did go rightly to God's Light and Gift in their Hearts they would not hold such gross Errors But he says I blame them for going from the outward to the inward which is not so See p. 22. Again they censure him in his blaming me for not naming the Day Month or Year wherein that Yearly meeting at Philadelphia was held which he makes the ground of his perversion and would excuse it You see he argues like a rare Logician He says I do not name the Year nor Day nor is it in p. 14 nor p. 18. But what then I do it in another page This is rare Logick Now I say you have both in p. 3. quoted from The Plea of the Innocent Which p. 3. T. Ellwood has quoted for another purpose but could not see it for that And all this Proof is that I did not tell it in p. 14 nor p. 18 but I did it in p. 3. His Argument is a Sophism and is faulty in not making a sufficient enumeration Again they censure him for charging me with Nonsence Pray may not a meeting held six months after contradict a meeting going before Very well But he has given out that I am so weak a man that I cannot write sence This morning one came to me with Henry Goldney and said People would hoot at me in the Meeting but it is fulfilled on themselves thinking me craz'd And so here is a Paper against me that I cannot speak sence And why Because he feigns that I said a meeting six months before contradicts a meeting held six months after it when there is no such thing but that a meeting six months after contradicts a meeting six months before When Tho. Ellwood could not prove that I began the Separation at Philadelphia by any Evidence of Matter of Fact he essays to do it by false Logick arguing That the Cause must be before the Effect Therefore because I say Th. Loid and they that were Magistrates went away this was the beginning of the Separation and a cause of it And so when he cannot bring a reason in Matter of Fact he will go to false Logick for it So I answer'd his Argument saying All learned men that write of causes and effects acknowledge that a priority of time is not necessary to the cause but it is enough that there be a priority of nature the first moment the Sun was created there was light And then besides the cause cannot be the effect says he if their going away from that meeting were the cause of the separation it was not the effect But I said to him formal and material causes may be both cause and effect As for example The formal and material causes of a man are his Soul and Body and they are the man The material and formal causes of this House are the Stones the Bricks the Timber and the Fashion Now here these causes are the effect Now Th. Loid's going away was a cause of the Separation and yet was a beginning of the Separation And is it not shameful They accuse me of Separation but they run to a perversion of Philosophy to prove it by that the cause is before the effect when they have no other Arguments against me but false Logick and vain Philosophy and Deceit and his own Brethren here in this Paper do censure him for his arguing unfairly by Logical nicety Here is another Observation of these honest men they censure him for saying he did not understand that the Doctrine of the Faith of Christ as he died c. being necessary to our Salvation was reputed a Doctrine in Controversie betwixt us Whereas the principal Doctrine in Controversie between them and me was about the Faith of Christ as he died c. whether necessary to our Salvation Here is something also to take notice of that he blames me as not fair for not putting my Name to my Book nor the Name of the Printer Now the Quakers have done so in England in Suffering Times and yet the Printer in America was prosecuted by an Act of Parliament for not printing his Name to some of my Books and they took away his Letters and Frame But I find that which is Persecution in England is esteem'd good Justice in Philadelphia Quaker N. Marks I have something to propose to you if you please We are all in general very apt and too apt to have a good Opinion of ourselves it is very near to Mankind to do so You have very well answer'd the Design of this meeting in this you have heard him with a great deal of temper I desire you further to consider that all considerate men when they hear one part hear but with one Ear. So far as G. Keith thinks fit to make this publick you may expect an Answer and I hope you will reserve one Ear to hear that