then told him there p. 111. By this he may see how far he is degenerated and apostatized from his former Principles Then he was not for ascending descending or sending to Jerusalem to have Tydings of Christ brought from thence because he then witnessed him Christ the Word of God nigh him even in his Heart But now being gone from the Word in his Heart and turned against it he is it seems for having Men directed to the Type for the Antitype to the outward Temple or to Ierusalem for Jesuâ— Christ and his Blood Thus far in my former of which he takes no more notice than if he had winked with both Eyes and never seen it His Cavil in p. 26. That they the Quakers in their Preachments a Word he uses in contempt and scorn as other Prophane People do have used to stop at the eighth verse of Rom. 10. and go no farther is both idle and false For they have not used to stop there but have gone further and from ver 9 th have opened and shewed what that Mouth Confession and Heart-belief there spoken of should be which is necessary and effectual to Salvation which in the 10. ver is called a Believing unto Righteousness the same that in the 6 th ver is called The Righteousness of Faith which directs not to say who shall ascend or descend to bring Christ down or up but directs to the Word that is nigh thee in thy Mouth and in thy Heart which says the Apostle Is the VVord of Faith which we preach that if thou shalt confess with thy Mouth from this Word of Faith that is nigh thee even in thy Mouth the Lord Iesus and shalt believe in thine Heart from and by this Word of Faith that is nigh thee even in thine Heart that God hath raised him from the Dead thou shalt be Saved though thou go not to the Type the material Temple for the Antitype nor look to Ierusalem the place where Christ suffered whither the Baptist and G. Keith would send thee to find him now there For as it was said by the Angel aâ— the Sepulchre after his Resurrection Surrexit non est hic He is risen He is not here Mark 16.6 much more may it be said since his Ascension with respect to those outward places where he was Crucified and Buried Ascendit non est hic He is ascended He is not here Now as the Apostle by disswading Believers from saying who shall ascend or descend to bring Christ down or up and directing them to him as the Word nigh in the Mouth and Heart did not reject nor undervalue the Death of Christ at Ierusalem or the Vertue of his Blood shed there So neither did G. Whitehead in blaming the Baptist for directing People now to go thither or look thither for it as if it were now to be found there This in effect I told G. Keith before in Truth Defended p. 109. Where I said It was no Error in the Apostle Paul to direct according to the Righteousness of Faith to the Word nigh in the Mouth and in the Heart Though he knew well enough that Christ had suffered at Ierusalem and that but a little before yet he did not direct Men to the outward Temple or to Ierusalem though both then standing to find Christ or his Blood there For he knew that Christ was not then to be found outwardly either at the outward Temple or at Ierusalem but they that came to the Word nigh in the Mouth and in the Heart would both find Christ and feel the Virtue of his blood even of that Blood which he offered upon the Cross nearer home So neither is it any Error in G. VVhitehead to say The Quakers see no need to direct Men to the Type for the Antitype viz. neither to the outward Temple nor to Ierusalem either for Jesus Christ or his Blood Nor in so saying doth he deny or disesteem Jesus Christ or his Blood for he directs with the Apostle where Men may both find Jesus Christ and may feel the Virtue of his Blood but he rejects the Notion of his Opponent who it seems would have Men directed to the Type for the Antitype G. VVhiteâ—ead therefore has not falsified the Scriptures and made them to say what they say not as G. Keith falsly Charges him But G. Keith hath falsly accused G. Whitehead and grosly perverted both his Meaning and his Words and that not only here but in his Gross Error p. 15. also The next thing hâ— offers is Solomon Eccles's Letter a Copy of which he gives in p. 28. But before he read it he said p. 27. Next you shall hear Solomon Eccles 's Letter That the Blood of Christ is no more than the Blood of another Saint This he did to prepossess his Auditors with an ill Opinion of it before they heard it and he also wrong'd S. Eccles in those Words For he delivers it as S. Eccles's That the Blood of Christ indefinitely and without any Distinction is no more than the Blood of another Saint Whereas it is evident by the Letter it self as he has given it that S. Eccles did distinguish between the Blood of Christ which was offered up in the Eternal Spirit Heb. 9.14 and the Blood that was forced out of him by the Souldier after he was Dead The Blood that was offered up by Christ himself in the Eternal Spirit Heb. 9.14 he declares he did very highly esteem of even to be more Excellent and Living and Holy and Precious than is able to be uttered by the Tongues of Men and Angels But that Blood which he said was no more than the Blood of an other Saint was the Blood that was forced out of him by the Souldier after he was Dead So that that upon which S. Eccles did ground the difference he put between the Blood of Christ in one respect and in another was that in the one it was a voluntary offering of Christ himself in and by the Eternal Spirit before his Death In the other it was the forcible Act of a Souldier after he was Dead and the Sacrifice compleated This G. Keith had he been fair even as an Adversary should have observed to his Auditors how much so ever he had disliked S. Eccles's Expression which I know no Quaker did ever approve much less undertook to Iustifie or Defend I am sure I did not nor G. VVhitehead neither in his Answer to Burnet out of which G. Keith Charges him with it For he therein as I noted in my former both disclaimed those VVords by saying I do not make S. Eccles 's Expressions therein an Article of our Faith and also for himself declared that he did own the Blood shed to be more than the Blood of another Saint Light and Life p. 59. And I called those Words of S. Eccles's an unjustifiable Expression Truth Defended p. 112. Therefore G. Keith is unjust in reflecting upon us as he does in p. 30. for though he gave
That this is the Only True and effectual way of knowing the Vse and Work of his Coming and Sufferings and Death in the Outward by turning and having our Minds turned inward unto himself near and in our hearts in the holy seed to know by an inward Feeling and good Experience his Doings and Sufferings in us by being made conformable thereunto He adds p. 156. And therefore This is the True Method and Order which we have found greatly blâ—ssed of God which the Lord hath taught us to hold forth unto People whereby they attain unto Holiness to a being made conformable unto the holy Life of Jesus Christ and come to know the true and great End and Use of his outward Coming viz. In the First place to point and turn their Minds unto the Light of Jesus Christ who hath enlightened them and every one and hath sown a Seed of his Light Life and Spirit in every one unto which Seed they should give the most inward of their Hearts The Reader may easily see the difference between G. Keith then and G. Keith now Now he says Quakerism was introduced into his heart by believing in Christ without and in Christ within at once and by one Faith But then he told us The True and Only Method yea not only the best but the only true Method of Preaching for the bringing People into the Faith and acknowledgment of the Christian Religion is First which word he repeats over and over again and again and in the First place to inform them of this Universal Principle the Light within so that they may believe it and not only so but may also observe its operation in them This he then made the Chief thing the First thing the First step the Introduction in the right the best the true the only true Method and Order of Preaching the Gospel And then viz. after this inward Principle this Light within is preached received believed and its operation within observed than to direct them to and inform them of the Scriptures and things therein declared which said he they cannot receive believe or understand but in the Divine Light So that whatever he may now pretend he would have answered to Faldo's Charge as he call it if he would have answered according to what he hath formerly writ he must have acknowledged that Quakerism as it is called was introduced by Preaching the Light of Christ within tho' not in opposition to Christs Appearance without in that Body of Flesh wherein he suffered which W. Penn took particular care to express Now let us again set down Faldo's Exception and W. Penn's Answer to it so far at least as G. Keith cites it I. Faldo said Christanity was introduced by preaching the promised Messias and pointing at his Humane Person but Quakerism by preaching a Light within To this said VV. Penn I answer That this is nothing injurious to the Quakers at all but highly on their side for had they preached a Christ now coming in the Flesh they had denyed his True and only Great Visible Appearance at Jerusalem which all true Quakers own let that be marked by the way since then they believe that appearance and therefore need not Preach what is not to be again and that the whole Christian World besides have so long and lazily depended on it without their Thirsting after his Inward Holy Appearance in the Conscience c. There G. Keith stops and having made a false and envious Comment upon it p. 20 he says But let me again read out the intire paragraph yet reads no more but these few words being the imperfect part of a sentence he read before Since then they believe that Appearance but therefore need not Preach what is not to be again and there stops saying There it clinches But with his leave or without I shall Transcribe more of W. Penn's Answer as what I think conduces much to the opening of his meaning in this for after he hath in many particulars set forth the Effects and Benefit of Christ's Inward Holy Appearance in the Conscience he adds Since he has been so much talked of and depended on as to his then visible manifestation of himself and so little if at all desired after as to his spiritual and invisible coming into the hearts of Men to finish Transgression and bring in Everlasting Righteousness therefore God raised us up and we are now gone forth into the World to declare That he is spiritually manifested as then fully in that Body so now measurably in the Conscience of all People a Divine Light reproving every unfruitful Work of Darkness So that here is the Mischief saith he the Malice and Ignorance of our Enemies do us in this World that because we speak so much of and preach up and write for Christ's Inward and Spiritual Appearance as a Light to Mankind therefore they conclude with a mighty confidence that we deny his outward Coming Life Death Resurrection and Ascension and the Benefits thereof O Darkness it self We have our Witness with the Lord of Heaven and Earth that we own him to be the Saviour General of the whole World as to that Appearance and that he obtained precious Gifts for Men but we say and our Adversaries have not wherewith reasonably to unsay it that First the Divine Light Life or Power that shined through that blessed Manhood was excellently the Saviour and the Manhood but Instrumentally And Secondly No Man or Woman in the World is savingly benefited by his then appearing as a Saviour c but as every such individual Person comes to experience his Internal manifestation to convince condemn wound heal break bind up slay make alive in the Neâ—ness of the Spirit This is the state of Right Redemption and Salvation and thus is he particularly a Saviour and every such one is greatly benefited by him as he was in that former Appearance the general Saviour of Mankind Now mind how he concludes Behold then O ye that are Impartial how unworthily he hath injured us to make People believe that we testifie to Christ's Inward Appearance in Opposition to and denial of his Outward which is far from our hearts so much as to conceive The like may well be said concerning G. Keith Bâ—hold O ye that are Impartial how unworthily he hath injured W. Penn to endeavour to make People believe that he would have Christs Birth Death Resurrection Ascension c. thrown over the Shoulâ—er as hiâ— Phrase is given up and buried in Oblivion from Posterity which is the wicked Comment he makes upon and false Consequence he draws from W. Penn's words though far from W. Penn's heart so much as to conceive and indeed far from his Practice too For it is well known and G. Keith himself cannot be ignorant that W. Penn as well as other Ministers amongst the Quakers hath many times in Preaching commemorated the miraculous Birth Holy Life admirable Miracles and most heavenly Doctrines of the Man Christ Iesus
though that Book not treating so directly of that Subject hath not so many Instances in it as are in other Books of his In that very Page 47. out of which he takes his first Quotation against G. Whitehead upon Iohn 17.5 And now O Father glorifie me with thine own self with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was G. Whitehead says Was not he the true Christ the Son of God that so prayed unto the Father And in the same Page just after the Words G. Keith carps at upon the Baptist's saying Which Word was God yet he was not a Saviour as he was the Word or Creator of the World c. G. Whitehead replies How then doth He say I am God a Saviour c. And in Page 48. upon the Baptist's saying He was not a Saviour as the Root and Creator of Man but as he was to be the Offspring of Man c. G. Whitehead Answer'd Do but mark the Confusion and Darkness of this Man who hath denyed that God the Word or Creator of Man is a Saviour and Christ as he was the Root and Creator of Man and as He was the Eternal Son of God from the Days of Eternity he hath denied to be a Saviour but as he was the Off-spring of Man Do but Eye the tendency of this Doctrine thus to deny the Son of God to be a Saviour whereas it is through the Son of God that Eternal Life is received Iohn 3.16 And God's Love was manifest in sending his only begotten Son into the World So here the Efficacy of the Son of God and the Eternal Word is proved against the Baptist's false and unscripture like Distinction It was in the Year 1668. that this Book was Printed In the Year 1669. G. Whitehead writ another Book which I mentioned before called The Divinity of Christ and Vnity of the Three that bear Record in Heaven with the blessed End and Effects of Christ's Appearance coming in the Flesh Suffering and Sacrifice for Sinners Confessâ—d and Vindicated by his Followers called Quâ—kers In that Book between the Epistle and the first Chapter giving a brief Account of what we own touchâ—ng the Divinity and Godhead of Christ he says That there are Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and that these Three are one both in Divinity Divine Substance and Essence not three Gods nor separate Beings That they are called by several Names in Scripture yet they are Eternally One in Nature and Being One Infinite Wisdom one Power one Love one Light and Life c. Then adds We never denied the Divinity of Christ as most injuriously we have been accused by some prejudiced Spirits who prejudicially in their perverse Contests have sought occasion against us as chiefly because when some of us were in Dispute with some Presbyterians we could not own their unscriptural Distinction and Terms The Father's begetting the Son and the Spirit 's being sent we witness to and own Yea the Son of God is the brightness of his Glory and the express Image of his Substance So the Manifestation of the Father of the Son and Holy Spirit we confess to c. And that Iesus Christ being in the Form of God thought it no robbery to be equal with God and yet as a Son was sent of the Father c. So that the Deity or Divinity of Christ in his Eternal Infinite Glorious State we really confess and own In the Book it self p. 18. He says He Christ was equal with God in Glory before the World was Again p. 19. It was never any Design or Plot of ours to endeavour to prejudice the Minds of any against the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost as falsly and blasphemously we are accused by this our prejudiced Opposer Again p. 22. We never disowned the Deity of Christ or Holy Ghost as falsly and injuriously is insinuated against us Again p. 26. Charging us with designing to blast and overthrow the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost upon which Blasphemers and Blasphemy and damnable Speeches are hideously cast upon us but most unjustly and falsly For no such design ever had we as either to blast or overthrow the Deity of Christ or Holy Spirit we having openly professed and declared the contrary both in Words and Writings Again p. 32. That the Divine Essence or Godhead can be but one and this in each of the Three we never denied Again p. 38. I have heard of some beyond the Sea who were accused with denying the Divinity of Christ but I know of none here that either deny the Divinity of Christ or him to be of one Substance with the Father Again p. 41. Christ being the Brightness of the Glory of God and the express Image of his Divine Substance as also truly called the Son of his Love c. Second Part of the same Book p. 3. We never denied the Deity or Divinity of either Father Word or Holy Ghost Again p. 39. His Opponent T. Danson having charged the Quakers with denying Christ to be God G. Whitehead Answers This is an apparent slander cast upon us as our Books and Writings do shew that we never denied Christ to be God or his Divinity c. Again p. 54. As to Socinianism as he calls it we are neither discipled in it nor baptized into Socinus his Name neither do we own him for our Author or Pattern in those things which we believe and testifie nor yet do we own several Principles which I. O. relates as from Socinus and principally that of Christ's being God but not the most High God It was never our Principle for tho' we do confess to his Condescension Humility and Suffering in the Days of his Flesh wherein he appeared in the form of a Servant being made in Fashion as a Man Yet his being in the Form of God and being glorified with the same Glory he had with the Father before the World began and his being God over all blessed for ever These things we professed and believed in the beginning and do the same still it never being in our Hearts in the least to oppose or desert them Again p. 58. As to a great part of his I. O's Book wherein he goes about to prove the Divinity or Deity of Christ c. We are unconcerned therein having never denied Christ's Divinity Here one would think were Instances enough of G. Whitehead's and ours owning and confessing Christ to be God to make G. Keith blush for charging him with denying it But because I know G. Keith hath too far and too long abandoned Modesty and Vertue to be easily drawn to blush I will add some more out of another Book written by G. Whitehead and Printed the same Year 1669. called Christ ascended above the Clouds c. in Answer to one Iohn Newman a Baptist who having it seems asserted that The Word was in the beginning but Christ was in time not till he had taken
to Friends Printed in 1694. from p. 51. to p. 56. And again in another Book of mine called A further Discovery Printed the same Year from p. 93. to p. 98. Which latter is one of those Books G. Keith hath not replied to He taxes VV. Penn with uncharitable Dealing in saying above The whole Christian VVorld has lazily depended on it Is there none says he in the Christian VVorld but the Quakers that thiâ—st after the Power of God in their Souls I was never so uncharitable to think so cryes he But had he had either Charity or Iustice he would not have thought VV. Penn by saying the whole Christian World intended every individual Person in the Christian World When the Apostle Iohn said The whole VVorld lieth in wickedness 1 John 5.19 Did he mean there was not one Person in the whole World but what lay in Wickedness When Iohn said All the VVorld wondred after the Beast Rev. 13.3 Did he mean every individual Person in the World No sure the VVoman that fled into the Wilderness Chap. 12.6 did not wonder after the Beast for she fled from the Beast When Mathew says The whole City came out to meet Jesus Mat. 8.34 Did he mean that there was never a man nor woman left in the City G. Keith knows that that way of speaking is Figurative used Synâ—chdochically the greater part being taken for the whole And in his Serious Appeal in Answer to Cot. Mather p. 9. he could urge that by way of Defence saying The Denomination of a thing is taken chiefly from that which is the greatest part and he might have taken it so here had not Enmity had too great a part in him For in p. 7. of the same Book W. Penn mentions Churches which is more extensive than particular Persons in these latter Ages in whom there might once have been begotten some earnest living Thirst after the inward Life of Righteousness This G. Keith might well have observed for he makes another Cavil out of the foregoing part of this very Sentence which was this p. 6 7. The Distinction betwixt Moral and Christian the making Holy Life legal and Faith in the History of Christ's outward Manifestation Christianity so it should be read the Words Christianity and Manifestation being transposed and misplaced in the Printing as is obvious has been a dâ—adly Poyson these latter Ages have been infected with to the Destruction of Godly Living and Apostatizing of those Churches in whom there might once have been begotten some earnest living Thirst after the inward Life of Righteousness This Passage depends upon the different Definitions of Christianity given by I. Faldo and W. Penn. I. Faldo it seems defining Christianity said By Christianity we are not to understand all those Matters of Faith and Practice which Christianity doth oblige us unto This W. Penn excepted against as reckoning that All those Matters of Faith and Practice which Christianity doth oblige us unto might well pass for Christianity Yet Faldo having granted that Christianity takes in whatever is worthy in those Religions it hath superâ—edâ—d yea the very Heathens From those Words VV. Penn inferred This then does not make Christianity a distinct thing in kind from what was worthy as he calls it that is Godly among either Iews or Heathen This is in p. 2 3. of VV. Penn's Book called Quakerism a New Nick-name for Old Christianity and having argued upon it in p. 4 5 and 6. and shewed the hurt and mischief that ensues upon rejecting Moral Vertues from being any part of Christianity he there concludes in the Words G. Keith carps at viz The Distinction betwixt Moral and Christian the making Holy Life legal and Faith in the History of Christ's outward Manifestation Christianity has been a deadly Poyson these latter Ages have been infected with to the Destruction of Godly Living c. As tending to perswade People too apt to be easily perswaded to looseness that a bare historical Belief of Christ's outward Appearance in the Flesh is of more value and advantage to them than a Vertuous Pious Godly Life To this G. Keith tacks another Proof as he calls it against W. Penn and then makes his Reflection on both together That other Proof he takes out of W. Penn's Address to Protestants p. 118 119. thus For it seems a most unreasonable thing that Faith in God and keeping his Commandments should be no part of the Christian Religion But if a part it be as upon serious Reflection who dare deny it then those before and since Christ's Time who never had the external Law nor History yet have done the things contained in the Law their Consciences not accusing nor Hearts condemning but excusing them before God are in some degree concerned in the Character of a true Christian. For Christ himself preached and kept his Father's Commandments he came to fulfil and not to destroy the Law and that not only in his own Person but that the Righteousness of the Law might be also fulfilled in us Rom. 8.4 Now says G. Keith comes the main thing Let us but soberly consider What Christ is and we shall the better know whetheâ— Moral Men are to be reckoned Christians What is Christ but Meekness Iustice Mercy Patience Charity and Virtue in Perfection Can we then deny a meek Man to be a Christian A Iust a Merciful a Patient a Charitable and a Virtuous Man to be like Christ G. Keith says In this way of arguing there is a Fallacy These Moral Vertues he says are a part of a Christian and belong to the Genus of a Christian. But there are two things in the true Definition of a Man the Genus and the Differentia They have the Genus says he but not the Differentia And I pray which is of most moment in this Case the Genus or the Differentia To have the Kind and Nature of a Christian or to have only some outward Character or discriminating Difference to distinguish a Christian from a Child of God as namely an historical Faith of Christ's outward Appearance in the Flesh at Ierusalem But since G. Keith allows these Moral Virtues to be a part of a Christian he needed not on this score have fallen so foul on W. Penn for he might have observed in those Words himself has cited that that which seemed to W. Penn so unreasonable a thing was That Faith in God and keeping his Commandments should be no part that is should by some be accounted no part of the Christian Religion And the Inference he made from what he had offered to shew it was a part of the Christian Religion was that If it be a part he does not say If it be the whole Then those before and since Christ's time who never had the external Law or History yet have done the things contained in the Law c. are in some degree concern'd in the Character of a true Christian. But for that extravagant Inference G. Keith would draw from W.
of a pretended Contradiction between W. Penn and I. Whitehead is very Idle in it self and wicked in him and the worse for that he urged it formerly in his Book called The true Copy c. And I answered then in mine called Truth Defended p. 131. which he takes no notice of as I did also answer in that Book much of what he hath now urged concerning Christ and his being the promised Seed from p. 113. to p. 123. Where also I gave several Quotations out of G. Keith's Bôoks shewing most plainly that he hath maintained the very same things he now condemns in others and yet will not condemn in himself as particularly in his Book called The Way cast up where Sect. 8. p. 93. In answer to an Adversary's Charge that we deny Jesus the Son of Mary to be the alone true Christ. He first answers This is a false Accusation We own no other Jesus Christ but him that was born of the Virgin Mary who as concerning the Flesh is the Son of Mary and the Son of David and the Seed of Abraham Then adds p. 93. And yet he was the true Christ of God before he took Flesh and before he was the Son of Mary or David or of Abraham For his being Born of the Virgin Mary made him not to be Christ as if he had not been Christ before But he was Christ before even from the beginning as says heâ— I shall prove out of Scripture c. And having brought divers Scriptures and Arguments from p. 93. to p. 99. to prove that Christ Jesus as Man was from the beginning and had from the beginning an Heavenly Manhood and Spiritual Flesh and Blood He there concludes thus This is the promised Seed which God promised to our Parents after the Fall and actually gave unto them even the Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Head of the Serpent And therefore tho' the outward coming of the Man Christ was deferred according to his outward Birth in the Flesh for many Ages yet from the beginning this Heavenly man the promised Seed did inwardly come into the Hearts of those that believed in him and bruised the Head of the Serpent c. Here G. Keith not only asserts that this Heavenly Man Christ was the promised Seed and did from the beginning inwardly come into the Hearts of Believers and bruised the Head of the Serpent but also calls him the Seed of the Woman and says God not only promised him but actually gave him even the Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Serpents Head unto our Parents after the Fall many Ages before his outward Birth in the Flesh. Surely he that writ this had no cause to quarrel with W. Penn for saying Christ's Body strictly considered as such was not the Seed of Promise G. Keith had more need to have reconciled himself to himself if he could in these two opposite Expressions of his viz. That God gave the promised Seed even the Seed of the Woman actually to our Parents after the Fall many Ages before his outward Birth in the Flesh Way cast up p. 99. And That Christ did not become the Seed of the Woman according to the Sense of Gen. 3. Vntil the fulness of time that he was made of a Woman True Copy of a Paper p. 20. And he should have done well to have informed his Reader how God did actually give unto our Parents after the Fall so many Ages before Christ's outward Birth in the Flesh the Seed he promised them Gen. 3. Even the Seed of the Woman And yet Christ not be the Seed of the Woman according to Gen. 3. until so many Ages after he was actually given as the Seed of the Woman This is part of what I said to him in my former Book called Truth Defended p. 117 118. which rather than Answer he chose to cut himself out new work at Turners-Hall He pretends he did not Answer my Books in Print because he had not time to write nor outward Ability to Print I have shewed the Falshood of that pretence in the fore part of this Book yet let me now ask If that had been true why did he not then at his Meeting at Turners-Hall Answer my Books viva voce which then lay at his door unanswered and both Refute them if he could and acquit himself from those many Clinching Quotations I had therein hâ—mpered him with out of his own Books by explaining defending or Retracting them This I think every considerate Person will judge had been more properly his Province than wholly over-looking this to spend his time in impeaching Others by Renewing his old Baffled Charges before he had cleared himself from being guilty of the same Errors as he calls them which he had charged others with For if they whom he hath charged were as bad as he endeavours to make them yet he of all men is not fit to charge them till he has acquitted himself from the Imputation he lies under of being guilty of the same things This is so plain a Case that it may be hoped upon his next Indiction of such a Mock Meeting at Turners-Hall or elsewhere some of his Auditors when they are together will think fit to put him upon this just and necessary Work and I had like to have said hold him to it but that I consider he will be held to nothing However to furnish any such a little further with matter of that kind to invite him to I will not think much to transcribe another Quotation or two of his which I gave him in my former Book p. 119 120. The first is taken out of his Appendix to his Book of Immediate Revelation p. 256. where speaking of the spiritual Generation and Birth of Christ in us he says Thus we become the Mother of Christ in a spiritual sense or according to the Spirit as the Virgin Mary was his Mother after the Flesh. And this Spiritual Mystery Christ himself did teach in the days of his Flesh when he said Whosoever shall do the Will of my Father which is in Heaven the same is my Brother and Sister and Mother Mat. 12.50 And thus says G. Keith Christ according to his spiritual Birth in the Saints is the Seed of the Woman for that the Saints are the Woman that bring him forth after the Spirit and are his Mother as Mary brought him forth after the Flesh and after the Spirit also so that she was the Mother of Iesus in a double respect for as she brought him forth in her Body so she brought him forth in her Soul otherwise he could not have been her Saviour c. Here G. Keith calls Christ the Seed of the Woman according to his spiritual Birth in the Saints and yet quarrels with W. Penn for saying The Seed Christ must be inward and spiritual Again In the Way cast up p. 102. he says For indeed seeing he Christ is called as really Man before his ouâ—ward Birth in the
he knows wâ—re Io. Horn's terms But I observe he takes occasion from hence to make Sport with G. Whitehead and W. Penn their Philosophy even so far as to ridicule Divine Inspiration For he says he has oft told G. Whitehead that he and W. Penn will needs embrace false Notions in Philosophy they will needs seem to be Philosophers by Divine Inspiration as well as Ministers and Preachers by 〈◊〉 Had not the Philosophy himself so much dotes on and glories in been as his own phrase was a Ditch and a foul Ditch too he would have been more cleanly in his Expression and not have made Divine Inspiration the Subject of his Frothy Flout But it is high time for him to tack about and deny Divine Inspiration if he aspire to Preferment in that Church against which he has formerly said so much for it Thus having answered all his Quotations against G. Whitehead concerning the holy Manhood or Divine Existence and spiritual Being of Christ in Heaven as he is the Heavenly Man shewed that G. Whitehead hath not denied it I shall give a few Instances out of G. Whitehead's Books those especially which G. Keith has pickt his Cavils out of to manifest his owning the Holy Manhood or Bodily Existence of Christ in Heaven In his Book called The Light and Life of Christ within p. 9. refuting the slander of his Opponent he says False it is That the Quakers Christ is not Gods Christ or that they deny the Man Christ or the Christ that is in the Heavens In his Book called Christ ascended above the Clouds p 16. when his Opponent had asserted that Christ cannot dwell in Man and given this as his Reason For Christ is perfect Man as well as perfect God He does not deny that Christ is perfect Man as well as perfect God but denies the Consequence that therefore Christ cannot dwell in Man Mind his Answer which is this To say Christ cannot dwell in Man doth not only oppose his Spirituality Deity and Omnipotency but also is contrary to the Apostles plain Testimonies of Christs being in the Saints And if he be perfect God he can dwell in his People as he hath promised and surely his being perfect Man doth not put a Limitation upon him as a Let or Hinderance to disable him from being in his People whilst he who was Christ as come in the Flesh was also truly Jesus Christ within in his spiritual Appearance and we do not confine him under this or that particular Name Again p. 17. I grant that Christ arose with the same Body that was crucifiâ—d and put to Death and that he ascended into glory even the same glory which he had with the Father before the World begun Many more Instances might be added But the Reader may take notice that in my last Book called Truth Defended written about a year ago in Answer to two Books of G. Keith's and which he hath not yet replied to I gave a dozen Instances out of those Books which G. Keith has carped at to shew that G. Whitehead did own the Manhood of Christ one of which seeing he hath not taken notice of them I may repeat here referring the Reader to p. 161. of that Book of mine for the rest That which I now repeat is out of a Book called The Christian Quaker and his Divine Testimony Vindicated Part 2. p. 97. where G. Whitehead saith To prevent these Mens scruples concerning our owning the Man Christ or the Son of Man in glory I tell them seriously That I do confess both to his miraculous Conception by the Power of the holy Spirit over-shadowing the Virgin Mary and to his being born of her according to the Flesh and so that he took upon him a real Body and not a fantastical and that he was real Man come of the Seed of Abraham and that he in the days of his Flesh preached Righteousness â—rought Miracles was Crucifiâ—d and put to Death by wicked hands that he was buried and rose again the third Day according to the Scriptures and after he arose he appeared diversly or in divers forms and manners he really appeared to many Brethren 1 Cor. 15. and afterwards ascended into Glory being translated according to the Wisdom and Power of the Heavenly Father and is glorified with the same glory which he had with the Father before the World began c. Is it not strange Reader that G. Keith should have the face to charge G. Whitehead with denying the Manhood of Christ who hath so often and so plainly confessed to it What else is this but to pin a wrong Belief upon a Man to make him seem erroneous whether he will or no But this is worst of all in G. Keith who hath so often taken upon him to defend our Principles and Us against Opposers in his former Books And even but lately in his Serious Appeal printed in America 1692. in Answer to Cotton Mather of New-England having justified G. Whitehead and W. Penn in their Answer to Hicks and Faldo says p. 6. I do here solemnly charge Cotton Mather to give us but one single Instance of any One Fundamental Article of Christian Faith denied by us as a People or by aâ—y One of our Writers or Preachers generally owned and approved by us And in p. 7. he adds According to the best knowledge I have of the People called Quakers and these most generally owned by them as Preachers and Publishers of their Faith of unquestioned Esteem amongst them and worthy of double Honour as many such there are I know none that are guilty of any one of such Heresies and Blasphemies as he accuseth them And I think says he I should know and do know these called Quakers and their Principles far better than C. M. or any or all his Brethren having been conversant with them in Publick Meetings as well as in private Discourses with the most noted and esteemed among them for about 28 years past and that in many places of the World in Europe and for these divers years in America This more generally But with respect more particularly to our owning the Man Christ hear what he said in the Appendix to his Book of Immediate Revelation 2d Edit p. 133. And here says he I give the Reader an Advertisement that although the Worlds Teachers and Professors of Christ in the Letter accuse us as Deniers of Christ at least as Man and of the Benefits and Blessings we have by him yet that the Doctrine and Principles of the People called Quakers as well as the People do indeed more acknowledge the Man Christ Iesus and do more impute all our Blessings and Mercies that are given us of God as conveyed unto us through him unto the Man Iesus than any of them all And he gives the Reason too Inasmuch says he as we do believe and acknowledge that a measure of the same Life and Spirit of the Man Iesus which dwelt in him in its Fulness and
had its Center in him which then came in the Flesh c. is communicated unto us and doth extend it self into our very Hearts and Souls and whole inward Man so that the Man Iesus whom Simeon embraced with his Arms according to the Flesh is according to the Spirit our Light and Life and Glory And in p. 246. thus I hope it may appear how much more we own Christ Iesus not only as God but as Man and that both inwardly and outwardly for through the Measure of the Life of Iesus Christ as Man made manifest in us we have immediate Fellowship and Union with the Man Christ Iesus also without us who is ascended into the Heavens He has done he says as to the Object of Faith at least at present and so have I. Wherein I observe he charges not VV. Penn at all directly nor otherwise than as having owned those Books of G. VVhitehead's out of which G. Keith pretends to prove his Charge But before I follow him to his next Head I would Note to the Reader that all he hath said or can say against G. Whitehead or W. Penn concerning their denying Christ the Object of Faith either as God or Man he himself hath plainly and fully overthrown by a Story he tells in p. 38. of his Narrative where he says that in the Year 1678. three Persons whom he calls Quakers but will not Name did blame him for saying it was lawful to pray to Jesus Christ Crucified and dared him he says to give an instance of one English Quaker that he ever heard pray to Christ. Whereupon says he W. Penn said I am an English Man and a Quaker and I own I have oft prayed to Christ Jesus even him that was Crucified And he adds that G. Whitehead to decide the Matter took the Bible and read 1 Cor. 1.2 To all that call upon the Lord Iesus Christ both their Lord and ours This it seems G. Whitehead did to prove the lawfulness of praying to Christ Jesus even him that was crucified And this whether the Story in all its Circumstances be true or no proves beyond gainsaying against G. Keith that G. VVhitehead and VV. Penn were then sound in the Faith and of a sound Judgment concerning the Object of Faith Christ Jesus both as he was God and as he was Man And that is enough to shew both that the Charge itself of their denying Christ the Object of Faith is false and that the Quotations G. Keith gives for Proofs thereof out of Books of theirs written mostly about that time or not long before are perverted and wrested by him to a Sence quite contrary to their Judgments who writ them And therefore ought not by a considerate and impartial Reader to be regarded or received against them He now comes to that which he calls the Act of Faith or the Vertue of Faith which he would have People believe has been denied or contradicted by VV. Penn and for Proof refers Nar. p. 19. to a Book of VV. Penn's called Quakerism a new Nick-name for old Christianity written in 1672. in Answer to Iohn Faldo whom G. Keith himself within these four Years called A most partial and envious Adversary serious Appeal p. 60. and mentioned with Approbation W Penn's Answers to him and in his Book called The Christian Faith c. p. 6. refers his Reader thereto for satisfaction The Words he now carps at he takes out of p. 12. of VV. Penn's said Book where having set down Faldo's Charge that Christianity was introduced by Preaching the promised Messiah and pointing at his humane Person but Quakerism by Preaching a Light within G. Keith first tells us what he would have said if he had this to Answer viz. Any Quakerism says he I know of that I learned was introduced into my Heart both by believing in Christ without and in Christ within at once and by one Faith Here he makes a Transition from Preaching to Believing and from a General to a Particular I. Faldo shews how in his Sence Christianity and Quakerism so called which though one he sets in Opposition came into the World namely both by Preaching But that by Preaching the Promised Messiah and pointing at his humane Person this by Preaching a Light within If it be true which G. Keith says that what he knew or had learnt of Quakerism was introduced into his Heart by Believing in Christ without and in Christ within at once and by one Faith Yet certainly he hath formerly delivered himself much otherwise And therefore that he would have given that Answer which he now doth had he been then to Answer Faldo is very unlikely seeing in a Book of his called The Vniversâ—l free Grace of the Gospel asserted Printed but the Year before viz. in 1671. he says This is the true and only Method which should be used by Preachers for the bringing People into the Faith and acknowledgment of the Christian Religion First to inform them of this Vniversal Principle what it is and turn them towards it that they may observe its Operation in them as it appeareth against the Lusts of this World and for Righteousness and Temperance And so as wise Builders to lay this true Foundation in its Proper place and as wise Husband-men and Planters to place this Divine Seed where it ought to be in order to its growth that it may spring up in them and the Life Power and Vertue of God in it may be felt And this will naturally bring People to own the Scriptures c. and to own Christ in the Flesh his miraculous Birth his Doctrine Miracles Sufferings Death Resurrection and Ascention c. p. 92. And thus says he again p 93. Men should be First turned towards this inward Principle Light Word and Seed of the Kingdom which being in them and they coming to feel it there they may the more readily be perswaded to own and believe it And as they come so to joyn to it that it springs up in them in the Light and Glory thereof they will see and feel the Scripture and the things therein declared to be of God c. And this is good Method and Order in the preaching of the Gospel So that it is evident saith he that we have the Best and Only True Method in in our Words and Writings First to turn People to the Light that they may believe it and then to direct them to and inform them of the Scriptures and things therein declared which they cannot receive believe or understand but in the Divine Light And in his Book called The Way to the City of God written in the year 1669 though not printed till 1678 p. 3. speaking of Christs coming both Outwardly and Inwardly he saith The knowledge of this Inward coming is that which is the More Needful and in the First place as being that by which the true and comfortable use of his Outward Coming is Alone sufficiently understood And in p. 154. having said