[Page]
[Page]

Proteus Ecclesiasticus OR GEORGE KEITH Varied in FƲNDAMENTALLS; Acknowledged by himself to be such, and Prov'd an Apostat, From his own Definition, Arguments, and Reasons. Contrary to his often repeated false pretentions, whereby he hath Laboured to deceive the People; telling them he is not varied from any Fundamental Principle, nor any Princi­ple of the Christian faith, ever since he first came among the QUAKERS.

With Remarks on DANIEL LEED'S abusive Almanack for the Year 1703. by way of Postscript.

Thou which Teachest another Teachest thou not thy self?

Rom. 2.21.

A double minded man is Unstable in all his ways

Jam. 1.8.

Printed at Philadelphia by Reynier Jansen

[Page]

THE PREFACE

Friendly Reader.

AS I hope, upon thy Serious consideration, thou wilt not take it amiss, that we have at this time, and in this man­ner appeared, against G. K. especially, considering the Fresh occasion he hath given us, since his last Arivall in America; some Relation of which appears in this following Book, so also thou an Seriously desired to consider, whether it doth not necessarily behove G. K. as he would approve himself, not only to be a Man of Pen; but also a Man Sound in Judgment, to prove himself consistant with himself, in and about divers Principles of Christianity, acknowledged by himself to be Fundamentalls, concerning which he is hereby plainly proved, to [...]y un­der great variations, Inconsistances, and Confusions; I say, doth it not behove him so to prove himself, instead of his thus Disturbing us, for others in our peaceable Religious A [...]emblys, or otherwise, since he that Teaches another, ought certainly first to Teach himself. And now as to the difference between our Friends and G. K. here, begun by him, about eleven or twelve Years ago; it was [...] about [...] of the universall necessity of the Faith and knowledge of Christ's outward Death and Suffering, in order to Salvation; for tho' he begun at that time, to Pick up such Sentences and passages, out of our Friends work [...] as by Straining and perve [...]ting, he thought he could render Odio [...]s to the People; and also to catch at some work, unadvised, and unwarrantable Expressions, from here and there an unweary Per­son, about other matters, (and disapproved by our Friends, on all occasions yet that about the universall necessity of Faith in Christ without us, was confessed by himself, severall times in Print, to be the main matter of Controversie with our Friends here, as in the following book is shewn: and he charged [...]t that time, severall Friends, with such words, as I have heard [...] [Page] [...] to be spoken by them. And indeed the first time [...] him [...] with our Friends, was about this [...] thing, [...] Meeting at Philadelphia, in the year 1691. were [...] and [...] the universall necessary [...] Faith [...] (viz.) Such he, I deny him to be a [...] of Christ, who doth not in the Co [...]se of his Ministry, [...] without us; [...] again without us; [...]; but that the [...] of Christ's Su [...]rings &c. without us, [...] necessary, to all and every one, in [...], and Salvation; and yet said he, I [...] he could not miss of Salvation. And I found in a Back of his, Printed but a little before, where he saith of [...] they could not perish, tho' they Dyed in that state. [...]. This ma [...]e me. I must Confess begin to admire, what the Man was all of a [...]dom so hard driving at; for thought I, if such Gentiles could not perish, tho' they Dyed without that Faith and knowledge of Christ in the outward, and yet could not be Saved, without they had that Faith and knowledge; where then must they have it, in order to save them? But quick­ly upon this, there was an honest Friend, and then a late Inti­mate of G. K's told me, G. K's Notions of the twelve Revolu­tions of Humane Souls: And that according to those Notions, those Faithfull Gentiles, as also Infants, born Idiots &c. should some time or other live again, by being born in other Bodies, in some place of this World, where they may have the Gospell expressly Preached to them, in order to perfect their Salvation: These things of so long standing, I speak not as trusting only to Memory; for I committed them quickly to writing, to prevent mistakes, through shortness of Memory. And hearing also that G. K. had been deeply Concerned, in Writing a Book of [...] Queries, concerning those twelve Revolutions. I got a fight [...] it, and [...] found, that his above method of Doctrine Exact­ly. Coresponded with the said Revolution Notions, as also did [...]ivers Passages (though some of them Coucht, in severall of his [Page] Books, than lately Printed against some in New England and Rh [...]d Island; in which I found, that he then held, that the [Express] Faith are knowledge of Christ without &c. was ab­solutely, and Indespensibly necessary, to the perfecting of mens Salvation: And hearing, that tha [...] Revolution Book was w [...]t in the year 81 or thereabouts, I searcht what Books I could get, of all he had published, from that time to the time of his differing here with us: And I think, I found scarce one; but had more or less, some Expression dropt, or at least Coucht, which really seemed to depend upon those Revolution Notions; but most plain, as the time came, or drew near, to his Differ­ing with our Friends here.

And now, since in pa. 25.26. of this book, I gave a relation of some concern betwixt G. K. and an other Person, about the Revolutions, James Coper Cloth worker of Darby, did many years ago give it, and more of his Strange Notions under his hand and is ready to give more (yet upon occasion) of his Whi [...] fi [...]S, that he was then bigg with, as he is now bigg with Imet­erate Hatted, and Persecuting Enmity, against his old Friends, who seing, and being sensible of his Spirit in time, could not humour him, upon which he grew so disorderly and [...]governa­ble in the Church, that our Friends saw a necessity of disowning him as a Minister of the Peacable Gospell among us.

And whereas, in this book pa. 8, there is mention made of G. K's Couching the Revolution Notions, in severall books; but for brevitys sake, did not insert them there, being Plenty of the said books, the Country, yet least some may be desireous to se something of it who cannot get the books, I shall the [...] however insert one or two Passages, not retracted, that I think, must needs make his Revolution Notions, speak out plain enough, to shew, how deep he [...] Drunk those Notions in.

Object. But he says he could never Justly own himself to be the Author of that Book, for others were concerned pa. 3.

Ans. I know not who ever Charged him to be the whole Au­thor; but for him to say, others [...]ere concerned, Implys, he was concerned as well as others.

[Page]O.b. But he says, those Books, (meaning those, where we cite him about the Revolutions), they were generally approved on, by Friends of the Ministry An [...]. and Sadu [...] pa. 9.

Ans But he doth not say, they were all so aproved, however we Read in Jude 9. There were some, who were not Right, that Crept in at unawares, Mark, at [unawares]; and it was told by the Apostle Peter: that there should be false Teachers, who would Privetaly bring in Damnable Herisies &c. So that's no new thing.

And now, whereas, there are in the said Revolution Book, many of the Queries, that really seem to be as Texts, to sever­all Passages in some books, afterwards writt by him, as above; I shall therefore, before [...]ci [...]e the Passages, lay down one of them, that it may be seen, how close he keeps his Doctrine to the Text, it's the 37. query, and the words are these, (viz.) ‘“ [...]eing Christ said, that this Gospell of his Kingdom, should be Preache to all the World, for a witness against them, is it not evident, that all the World, that is every Man that is born into the World, from the First to the Last, must have that very Gospell of the Kingdom, in which, Mention is made, of the Womans Powring Ointment on his Body, Preacht unto them; as well [Outwardly] as inwardly, before it can be made a wit­ness ”against them; compare Math. 24.14. with Math. 26.23.’ Thus much as to the Text: Now let's se G. K's, Doctrine, as agreeable there [...]), Pretended Antidote pa. 105. Where speak­ing of the meaning, or Extant of Christ's words, where he Com­mands his Gospell to be Preached to all Notions, and of his say­ing, so it shall be before the End; he saith, as his meaning u­pon those Texts, thus; ‘The Gospell that began to be Preache [...], “from Adams Fall Immediately, shall be Preacht to all Men, that Ever lived in the World: some time or other, before the End of the World; so that such as shall not Live in the latter Ages of the World, have had it Preacht in the former Ages, when ”they Lived in the World

‘“And therefore, (saith he) the Preaching of the Gospell to all the World; is the Preaching of it, to all Mankind, that ever [Page] Lived, and shall Live in the World, in all Ages, from the ” Beginning to the End &c. Thus far G. K. in pa. 104.105. Pretend. Antidote. pa. 107. Speaking of the like matter, he saith (as a Scripture Proof) ‘Else how is the Gospell Preachr to “every Creature; and now is Christ's Command to be fulfilled; that he hath given to his Faithfull Apostles, and to their Faith­full Successors, in all Ages? And how is the [...]ro [...]ecy of Christ ”fulfilled, that so it shall be before the End? &c.’ From all which the Reader may observe, that as the above cited Revolution Text explains the above mentioned Commands of Christ, (to Preach the Gospell to all Nations &c.) to mean, that it shall be Preach [...] to all Mankind that Ever lived, or shall live in the World, so does G. K's Doctrine too: And as that Text, by saying, it shall be so Universally Preacht; not only Inwardly, but also OUT­WARDLY, Implys, that it shall be so Preacht by the Apostles, or their Successors; so does G. K's Doctrine too: But how the Apostles, or their Successors should Preach the Gospell to that part of Mankind, that have hitherto dyed without it, as Infants, Heathens, Deaf and Dumb Persons &c. unless they come again, according to the Revolution Doctrine, I think it might behove G. K. to make out if he can; since he says, he is of the same Faith, as he hath been above this 30 years, Exact Narrative pa. 20.

CALEB PUSEY.

[Page 3]

Proteus Ecclesiasticus or GEORGE KEITH Varied in FƲNDAMENTALLS &c.

IF the Controversie depending between Ʋs and G.K. were to be determin'd by the Erring Judgment of his Partiall votaries; the disadvantage would doubtless be ours; But since our appeal is rather to the Truth in the hearts of the unbyass'd, who are willing to see for themselves, weigh matters in the Scailes of Justice, and then Judge; we see no reason to doubt, but that we shall be Justify'd in all their Consciences, it being for their sakes, the advancements of Truth in their esteem, and the remo­vall of some of the S [...]mbling-blocks out of the way of the weak and unweary, [...]st by this Adversary; that now I ap­pear, and not to gratifie his Contentious Temper with fresh fuell to his fire of R [...]ge and Envy.

The unparalell'd Confidence of this hardned man might have been matter of Admiration to such as have heard him in [...]m Auditories in America since his last comming over, b [...]dly affirm That he is not varied from many Fundamentall Principle of the Christian Religion ever since he fi [...] came under the Pr [...]f [...] the Quakers; [...] his shamefull Con­fession and s [...] onward [...] that particular as well as in other things had not appeared in Print from time to time, [Page 4] for these Ten or Twelve years past: But tho' that false pre­tence of his Stability, in the Fundamentalls of the Christian Faith, and unity with all the Faithfull Brethren (now de­cry'd and Expos'd by him) was his main Stratagem, where­by he betray'd divers into that unchristian seperation, which severall have both seen and lamented; so well is he now known in these parts of America that the Journall of his Travells and works of envy when published will not af­ford (I hope) any great Instance of the Efficacy of his La­bours; even among those that formerly went aside with him (save it may be some few of his Country folks about Shrewsbury who might possibly delay their Sprinkling, till he shou'd have the Trophy tho' his now Masters, seem not to have so much assurance of him as to trust him, with making of Christians) and perhaps not one may be insnared, and deceived by him from among the whole multitude of other perswasions.

That G. K. in the beginning of the difference here Im­pos'd upon his followers by telling them he was not chang'd in his Principles; Se his Truth and Innocency pag: 17. Some Fundamentall Truths pag: 11. l. 13. An Appeal pag. 5.

That G. K. hath since ascerted That he knows not any Fundamentall Principle, nor indeed any one Principle of the Christian Faith, that he had varied from, to this day; ever since he came among the Quakers; and that he is of the same Faith, he hath been above these Thirty years; and that he hath not retracted nor renounced any one assertion in any of his former Books, that ever was judged by him an Ar­ticle of Faith: Se his Exact Narative p. 15, 38. also his pre­face to his Retractations.

[Page 5] [...]st. For a more evident demonstration that G. K. is va­ried from divers Principles, formerly acknowledg'd by him­self to be Fundamentalls of the Christian Religion; he is now to be Considered as a Minister (tho' of the meanest Class) of the Church of England, and that what ever he hath here­tofore laid down as Fundamentalls, not Embraced by the fd. Church as such, he is now varied from, by taking upon him Orders among them: Especially since himself saith; ‘In “the main Articles of Faith ALL HER MEMBERS (much ”more her Ministers say I) are of one Mind.’ Se his Rea­sons for renouncing Quakerism &c. p. 34. Justify'd by him in his plain discovery pag. 6.

2. Secondly by a Summary Collection of divers Articles of Faith, Expressly by himself call'd Fundamentalls, besides what may be alledged against him, by Just Consequence as a Minister of that Church, as aforesaid.

1. I shall begin with what he hath often call'd the main matter of Controversie, at the beginning of the difference with us here; viz, The necessity of Faith in Christ, as he Outwardly Suffered for us &c. [...] he hath called a Funda­mentall Exact Narrative p. 14. And that he hath pretended this to be the main matter of Controversie with us here; Se Plea of the Innocent p. 17. Some Fundamentall Truths p. 14. Exact Narr. p. 49.

But by the way, it was Observed by Ʋs ten years ago, and also comitted to writing, that G. K. hath been very dexterous (or rather Sinisterous) and fallacious in wording the Matter in all those places to the altering of the State of the (then) Controversie. For the Question was not wheth­er Faith in Christ's Outward manifestation was necessary [...] [Page 6] Our Salvation and of all mankind to whom the Sufferings of Christ have been made KNOWN & revealed, either by the Holy Scriptures of otherways; for he was then told ex­pressly in a great mixed Auditory at Philadelphia by one of Our Friends, when he was discoursing hot [...]y with us about the necessity of that Faith; That that Faith was Indispen­sible necessary to all such to whom it was revealed or made Known: But that this answer did not satisfie him, se Truth and Innocency pa: 7.

2. Secondly of Christ's Subsisting; not only with a reasona­ble Soul; but Humane Flesh also. Which according to the Athanacian Creed, (now own'd by G. K. must be a Fun­damentall.

3. The Light within, he hath sufficiently owned to be a Fundamentall: Se his Preface to his universall free grace and his some Fundamentalls p. 10.

4. The fourth is about Perfection.

5. About Prayer.

6. Concerning our universall Testemony against Swearing.

7. Our Testamony against paying of Tiths; all with sever­all others he calls Fundamentalls in p. 10. and 11. of his Some Fundamentall Truth's &c.

8. In the Doctrine of the Trinity of Persons. And that this is a Fundamentall; Se the said Creed where it is said, ‘He “ther [...]fore that will be saved must thus think of the Trini­ty ”viz. that there is three Persons &c.

9. In pa: 14. of Exact Narr. a belief of the Resurrection of the body that dyeth he calls a Fundamentall.

If G. K. or any for him [...] that he hath re­tracted as former Errors; That would be nothing o the [Page 7] purpose in this Case; For (as above in his preface to his Retractations) he Confesses that he hath not any where Re­tracted any one assertion contained in any of his former Books, that was ever Judged by him an Article or Faith: But those Nine particulars above mentioned are not o [...]y accounted by him Articles; but also Fundamentall Articles of Faith. Neither do I find, that he hath, any where, retracted, any of the abovesaid Assertions; viz. That he is not Chang'd in his Principles.

Nor varied in Fundamentalls.

Nor hath renounced, nor retracted any thing, that hath been Judged, by him, an Article of Faith &c. which till he doe, he must needs stand Chargeable, with Incon­sequent and Confused Consequences, that necessarily fol­lows from them, Compared with the aforesaid nine parti­culars; for proof, whereof observe what followeth.

1st. Fundamentall. In the year 1670. In his Light and Truth &c. pa. 6. he deny's the [Express] knowledge and belief of Christ's taking upon him the form of a Man, and his Obedience and Sufferings therein, to be absolute ne­cessity unto Salvation; where it hath not been revealed to them.

But again in the year 1689. in his Presbyterian and Inde­pendant pa: 113. he Saith It may be very safety concluded that the Express knowledge and faith is absolutely and In­dispensible necessary, unto the finishing and perfecting of a mans Salvation.

About this time he seem'd very bigg with his Revolution Notions whereby great stress is laid upon the [EXPRESS] knowledge and belief of the outward Coming and Suffering [Page 8] of Christ in the Flesh &c. Se the 200. Queries pa. 37. the writing whereof he hath owned himself, in this Countrey to be concerned in; and se also his faint Defence when charged with it. Truth and Innocency pa. 3. But before the publication of that book I could never yet find that he would own that [Express] Knowledge and belief to be absolutely necessary, where it was Not Revealed; But those Notions making that Faith and knowledge feasible to all Nations, & to all the Heathens, Infidels & Infants▪ that have departed this Life, from the beginning of the World, by being born again in Christian Nations, where these things are Preached and believed; I find he hath not onely in the said 200. Queries Insinuated his whimsicall Imaginations of the Revolution of humane Souls: But likewise in divers parts of his said Indep. and Presbiter, Couched the same; Sep. 100. 102. 103. 105. and also in some other books, by him published about that time as his (pretended) Antidot, pa. 98. 104. 105. 109. 110. a Refutation &c. pa. 40. 43. 44.

But again in the year 1692. When he might easily perceive his Revolutionism was not like to take with the People, he then deny'd that [Express] knowledge to be ne­cessary, save to those to whom it is revealed, Truth and Innocency pa. 10. 17.

So that with G. K. in the year 1670. the EXPRESS Knowledge &c. was NOT necessary, where not revealed. In the year 1689. the Express knowledge &c. was abso­lutely and INDISPENSIBLY NECESSARY, and round about again, in the year 1692. & since, the Express Know­ledge &c. was NOT unversally Necessary; yet he would [Page 9] have us believe he is not Chang'd in his Principles.

But again, in his Truth and Innocency pa. 10. G. K. de­nys the Distinct as well as EXPRESS knowledge to be u­niversally necessary; but in page 106, 107. of his pre­tended Antidot, he accounts that Religion, where Chrisst, (as Com in the flesh) is not distinctly preached; is but such as Cornelius had, before Peter preached Christ unto him: And such Religion (saith he) is, perhaps, not unfittly by some call'd Deism: And that such is the first part of Reli­gion towards God as Creator, but not Christian; From all which, as well as from his affirming, in the Year before, the Express knowledge to be necessary, it's observeable; that in the years (89) and (90), when possibly he might have some hopes, the Revolution Doctrine might have taken footing, Then again both the [distinct and Express] knowledge was necessary; Because without the first mens best Religion was but Deism, and not Christian; and with­out the Last, mens Salvation, was imperfect; But then a­gain in the Year (92.) when he had so greatly differed with our Friends, about these matters, and his Revolu­tion Notions had taken ayre; but not like to take Root in the People, and we begun to Confront him with his for­mer books; O [...] then, neither the [Distinct] nor the [Ex­press] Knowledge was universally necessary; but then comes forth the new Distinction, that tho' neither the [Express] nor [Distinct] knowledge was necessary: Yet there is an [Implicit] knowledge that's UNIVERSALLY necessary; —What Strange Worke's here ? Is this an Judication of his great MEMORY, Parts, and Learning? Se his Truth and Innocency p. 17. Antichrists and Sadusces, p. 24. 25. &c.

[Page 10]Again p. 26. Ibim, he i [...]uates, as if Robert Barclay and himself were of one mind, in using the terms EX­PRESS, DISTINCT, HISTORICALL &c. To signifie, that they did not intend, that any were saved with Eter­nall Salvation, without all knowledge of Christ without us: That they were of one mind, in those days, is likely to be true; but that either of them, did then intend, by using those Terms, that none Could be Saved, without the Knowledge of Christ's Death, and Sufferings without us; I cannot think is True. First, because Robert Barclay, in his Apology pa. 132. 4 Edition saith; ‘As this Light is “ Received, and not Resisted, it workes the Salvation of all; even of those, who are Ignorant of the Death and ” Sufferings of Christ.

Secondly, because G. K. in his Ʋniversall free grace &c. p. 117. Saith, ‘That the Knowledge of him as in the out­ward, “is of necessity unto Salvation, we grant NOT Save ”onely where it is revealed.’

Again there is a Book in Manuscript, under G. K's own hand (but I have not yet seen it in Print, (and possibly he may remember, who once said, printing is but a cir­cumstance) It's called Certain Propositions of the Christian Religion &c. In the Second part whereof he saith; He ‘“that believeth in Christ, as he is the Word, the Light, the Life, the Power and Wisdom of God. The Gift of God, Revealing the Mercy and Love of God to his Soul, and is Faithfull and Obedient unto that Manifestation, shall be saved, tho' the outward coming of Christ in the ” Flesh, and his Suffering and Death [...] not [...] to them.’

Also, to the said book, there is another [...], Entitu­led, [Page 11] Some Short Observations upon H. M. his Remarkes u­pon my book of Immediate Revelation. In the Second part whereof p. 5. he saith thus, viz. ‘Christ within us is the “more necessary for us to know, and more important for our particular Safety to know; for they who know Christ without them, if they do not know Christ within them; cannot be saved; but they who know and believe in him within them, they may be saved, although they do not know him without; He as without having never been Re­vealed ”unto them.’

Now compare all these things with his late Doctrine, of the absolute necessity of the knowledge, and faith of Christ without, [Ʋniversally] in Order to perfect Justification and Salvation, (Se Truth and Innocency in severall places) and se if he be not Varied? And note, this is about one of those four Fundamentall Principles, That at Turners Hall he accused us of denying. Se Exact Narrative p. 14.

But now we Expect to be attested by G. K. as he did John Pennington, in his Antichrists and Sadduces pa. 24. for calling this distinction of [Express and Implicit] a late dis­tinction; For, saith he, it's an antient distinction, and Sufficiently Implyed in my Oldest books, and though he mentioned the term [Express] and did not Express the term [Implicit] yet it was really understood by him, as (saith G. K.) the Term [Iure Divino] implies the other term of the distinction when not Expressed viz. [Iure Humano] so the term [Express] Implies the other term [Implicit] tho' not Expressed.

Thus G. K. hath contrived a way (as he thinks) to make out the matter, and to prove, that he always held, that [Page 12] the Knowledge of Christ in the Outward, was Ʋniversally necessary to Salvation; and that he allways understood, the Term [EXPRESS] to Imply the Term [Implicit] But I shall now evidently show, that this could not be his mean­ing in his former books, without such great Contradiction to himself, as, I am apt to think, such a man as he, would be very unwilling to be found guilty of; For if he understood in his former bookes that the Term [Express] implies the Term [Implicit] then in Presb. and Indep. p. 111. he Saith. ‘It's certain, at that time when the Angel “was sent to Cornelius, he had no [Express] Knowledge, ”nor Faith in Christ Crucified.’ Now if he understood the Term [Express] Implied the Term [Implicit] then Cornelius had, at that time when the Angel was sent to him, Some knowledge of Christ Crucify'd &c. And yet about seven lines lower he saith, Cornelius when the Angel was sent to him, had no Knowledge nor Faith of Christ Crucified.

Again in p. 113. ib. Saith he ‘It may be very safely Con­cluded,“ that the [Express] knowledge, & faith of Christ Cru­cify'd, is not of absolute necessity, to the beginning of mans ” Salvation &c. Now, if by the Term [Express] he under­stood the Term [Implicit] was Implied, then the [Implicit] knowledge of Christ Crucified &c. And consequently some knowledge thereof, was absolutely and Indispensibly necessa­ry, to the beginning of mans Salvation; and [...] next page before, he saith Men may ha [...] [...] “ ”Salvation begun in them, when the Mystery of [...] and Resurrection, is not revealed unto them.’

Now is not here Contradiction upon Contradiction [...] and yet this is the man, that his Turners-hall company (whom [Page 13] he has since deserted, as he did his mistaken followers here▪ Ca [...]l [...] in preface to seasonable Testimony ‘A good Instrument “in the hand of God to Open the understandings of many ”and unfolding the deep Mysteries of the Gospel.

But Alas! what is much of it but Confusion; Saying and gainsaying; more like some of the Merchandize of Mystery Babylon, than the Simplicity of the Gospel of the Lord Je­sus. From the foregoing it's clear that when he used the Terms (Express knowledge) he did not understand that (Im­plicit knowledge) was Implyed Therefore a late distinction, and, as I. P. told him 'twas to serve a turn. I now has­ten to the Second Fundamentall viz.

2. Of Christs Subsisting of a Reasonable Soul and Humain Flesh that this is a Fundamentall, with them se the Athanaci­an Creed, where it's said; That this (among other things there) is the Catholick Faith [...] which except a man faithful­ly believe he cannot be saved.

Now G. K's in his Rector corrected p. 27. pleads against the word Humane as applicable to Christs Body, thus. In­deed the very Outward Visible flesh, which he took of the Virgin, seing it was not produced or formed by Humain Generation, —and that after Death it was not Subject to Cor­ruption; the Name Humane is but too mean a Title, where­by to express it far; less should it be called so now, when it is Glorified. And in p. 29. he brings Hillarius saying Jesus “ ”Christ was not formed by the Nature of Humain Conception; And also asks why is the flesh conceived of the Holy Ghost, Judged by the Nature of a Humain body?

In way Cast-up p. 131. he says of Christs body, That it is no more a body of Flesh, Blood and bone; but a pure [Page 14] Atheriall, heavenly body, like unto which, the bodies of the Saints are to be at the Resurrection, (tho' the said Creed saith; he hath Humain flesh &c.) Here we see G. K. once disowned the word Humain Flesh also, to be applicable to Christs body; especially since it is now Glorify'd. Now is he not in this also Varied? as much as to say at one time, Christ HATH Humain Flesh, and at another time, Christ hath NOT Humain Flesh.

3. I come now to the third Fundamentall viz. The Light within. It's well known how largely he hath Vindicated this acknowledged Fundamental: as to call it God & Christ, Hericy and Hatred p. 14. and that God and Christ can do all things, and that both God and Ghrist is in all men, se his Refutation p. 39.

Again, saith he, it hath not onely an enlightening pro­perty; but it hath all these other properties, To Sanctifie, to purifie, to Heal, to Mortifie &c. For it being the I­mage of God it hath its Perfections answerable unto those which are in God; So that as in God, there is Light, Life, Love, Goodness, Mercy, Righteousness, Wisdom, Power, &c. So in this Light that comes from him, there are all these things, by way of Participation, or Communi­cation, Universall free Grace &c. p. 7.

Again ibim p. 94. We averr, this universall grace, to be that very Evangelicall and Saving Grace, and not another, through which, it being Closed with, in Faith and Love, Salvation is Obtained, And we affirm it to be the very Grace of the Gospell, and Object of the Faith thereof.

Now behold, is not G. K. Varied from this? being now Joyned to those, whose Teachers, for the most part, (as in [Page 15] the same page he affirms) call this Light, only a Naturall Light, proceeding from mans own Nature: And possibly G. K. may have seen the book, written by a Priest, call'd Remarks &c. p. 19. 23. Also his Bretheren, the three Norfolk Rectors, in their book Intit. The Principles &c. p. 6. 57. where they call the Light a MEER CHEAT, GRAND IMPOSTOR, SPARK FROM THE DIVILS FORGE, A WHIMSICALL WITNESS fetcht from Terra Incognita. Do not they (with whom G. K. is now in unity) here vary from the large Confession of G. K. (as above) To the Divi­nity, Goodness, Righteousness, Mercy, Wisdom, & Power of the Light within? Behold the Great Ʋnity of G. K. and his (now) Brethren, & (by the same figure of speech) how Little he is Varid in Fundamentalls!

4. His fourth Foundamentall is, of Perfection. Se his Rector Corrected p. 196. 197. where he sufficiently ownes a freedom from sin to be attuniable, by the Grace of God in this Life; which saith he, to the Rector of Arow, we Af­firm, and thou denyst; Now he having once Affirmed this his acknowledge Fundamentall, and they denying it as G. K. there ascerteth, and he being now joyned with them, and that they are all of one mind; is he not therefore Varied in this Fundamentall also?

5. As to the fifth Fundamentall, viz. concerning Prayer. In his book call'd The Fundamentall Truths of Christianity (viz.) p. He saith; I [...] it had been the will of God, that such a way of Worship should have been used in the true Church, as a Com [...]on Liturgy or Set forms of Prayers, it would have [...] in the Apostles days. Nothing of this kind was known in the Church; either in Justin Mar­tyr's, [Page 16] or Tertulians time, who died above 200. Years after Christ. Now since G. K. Owns that such a Worship, and such set forms of Prayers, is not according to the will of God; because not used in the Apostles days, nor for, above 200. years after; and if he be not varied, let him reconcile this viz. That it is not according to the will of God, that such Worship, or set Forms of Prayer, should be used, with the practice of their Church, who continually use it.

6. As to the Sixth, about our refusing Swearing, acknow­ledged by him to be a Fundamentall as aforesaid; Se if he hath not renounced this article when he was made a Sworn Deacon, and Joyned to a Church, that allows of Swearing;

7. As to the Seventh Fundamentall; about refusing to pay Tyths; Hath not G. K. renounced this, since Joyned with those, who will not Stick, to Subpaena a poor man, per­haps 200. miles or more; even from the uttermost parts of England to London: For Tyth to the value of two or three shillings, or less; when for Conscience Sake he cannot pay them; whereby many times their Families are ruind, tho' they have an easier way to recover it: And, perhaps, it may not be too uncharitably thought, that his reasons, for re­nouncing this acknowledg'd Fundamentall, are so great, that thereby he is become more willing to renounce the rest, both Fundamentalls and others; that he might obtain the benefitt of his renouncing this ONE Fundamentall. But be it as it will, 'tis clear he has renounced this ONCE acknow­ledged Fundamentall.

8. The Eighth Fundamentall, is that of the Trinity of Persons; G. K. in his Way Cast up p. 88. Saith, The Holy Ghost hath not taught us these unscripturall Terms; [Page 17] and [...]aith, they rather darken than explain the Mystery and calls the Terms Three Persons in the Trinity; unfound and unscripturall Terms: And that it is great presumption, and smells of a Persecuting Spirit, to impose upon others those words, which the Spirit of God hath not taught nor left upon Record in the Scripture, And▪ further saith. That Augustin disputeth Solidly that the words three Persons are not properly applycable to the Mystery it self▪ And that Jerom deny'd and disputed against the three Hypostases. p. 86, 87, 88. ib.

Again, concerning Christ's being the Second Person in the Trinity. ‘This is a mere quible about the Invented words “ ”of Mans Wisdom (saith he) which we deny. Se Way Cast up p. 85. Now is not G. K. varied here? being joyned to that Church that expressly mentions the Trinity of Persons and hold it for a great Fundamentall, that they expressly say; ‘“He therefore that WILL BE SAVED, must THUS thinck ”of the Trinity &c. Se the Athanacian Creed in the Com. Prayer book. Then, surely it's a great Fundamentall with G. K. which he did not thinck so of formerly; therefore varied in this Fundamentall also, as much as to say of it one time, there are NOT three Persons, and at another time, there ARE three Persons.

9. I come now at last to his ninth Fundamentall viz. Of the Resurrection, of the body that dyeth; Now observe, In his Presb. and Indep. p. 229. he denys, in our Friend's Name, the Priests, CARNALL conceptions of the Resur­rection; & holds (as himself terms it) to Scripture words; so that, since the Church whereof he is now a Minister, are all of one mind, he must consequently, be one with them [Page 18] them that hold those carnall conceptions, contrary to which Church, his former conceptions must have been Spir­ituall; So that he must now differ, and vary from what he then hold, about this great Fundamentall, as much as Carnall Conceptions differ from Spirituall.

Again, in his book call'd A Testimony against that absurd Opinion &c. p. 3. he Saith ‘That which riseth is “the Mortall which puts on Immortality, and the Corrup­table ”that puts on Incorruption. But in Truth Advanced, p. 113. he saith, of that which riseth; ‘It neither con­sumes “in the Grave, nor corrupteth; neither is that which riseth Materiall Flesh, but flesh in a more excellent sence, ”than that vulgarly understood.’

Now observe again, since in one book he saith, of that which riseth, it is the CORRUPTABLE; is he not vari­ed in the other? Where he saith, that which riseth re­mains in the Grave, but Consumes not, NOR CORRUPT­ETH; and since that which Riseth he owns to be Flesh But not Materiall Flesh, as Vulgarly understood; is he not varied? Who Joyns with those, who hold it as it is vul­garly understood, the Same Materiall Visible boby of Flesh is to rise; Year that even our Lord himself Glorified in Hea­vens, hath a reasonable Soul and HUMAIN FLESH, sub­sisting.

And, that G. K's Strange Notions about this Fundamen­tall, I may yet more appear, to be much various, not one­ly from the Church he is now Joyned to, but also from the Common Belief of Christendom, I shall bestow upon him, a Large Transcript, out of his Truth advanced page 115, 116, 117; That it may be seen, what Ʋnscripturall N [...] ­tions [Page 19] he hath about it: And note, this book was published, some Years after, he was Seperated from the Quakers here, and after he had accused them, of denying the Resurrecti­on &c., Now thus G. K. viz. ‘The true Body of Man “that shall arise at the Resurrection of the Dead, lyeth hid (invisible to our gross and carnal Eyes) within that visible gross appearance of Flesh and Blood, even as the Kirnel of a Grain of Corn lyeth within the Husk, or as the preci­ous Gold lyeth within the course and gross Mineral or Mine; until the pure and precious Mettal be seperated from the Dross. And because this Seperation betwixt the pure and noble part, and that drossy part in Mans Body, is not immediately effected, therefore some time is requi­site after Death to effect that Seperation in the Grave, the measure of which [...] I will not determine, and when that Seperation is made, the Body remaineth and is lod­ged by divine Providence, that giveth to every thing its proper place, as in a certain invisible Grave or Sepulchre, that was mysteriously figured by the burial place, called Machpelah, that signifieth a double or twofold Cave or Sepulchre, which Abraham purchased from Ephr [...] the Hittite for four hundred pieces of Silver, Gen. 23. the which as it was litterally true, so is an Allegory, as di­vers Mystick Writers observe, and pointeth at the Myst­ery of the Resurrection Body out of the Mysticall and in­visible Machpelah or Sepulchre in Hebron, in the Land of Israel, figuratively and mystically understood; for Eph­ron signifieth the Dust-eater, and by 400 pieces of Silver, i. e. by so many Virtues (signified by Silver) this most excellent Burial-place is purchased from Ephron; but he [Page 20] who hath not these Virtues cannot [...]ave the Priviledge to be bu­ried in this most excellent place (which was in Hebron) that in Hebrew signifieth bordering or joyning; therefore it is said to be in the end of Ephron's field) and who cannot be buried there for lack of these Virtues, an Ʋntimely Birth is better than he, as the holy Scriptures declareth, Eccles. 6. 3. For it is no such Misery nor Unhappiness not to have an [outward] and visible Sepulchre, which many of the dear Children of God have, not had; but surely they have this [other more excellent] burial in the mystical Land of Israel, where all the dead Bodies of the Saints shall be raised up, and stand with the Lamb upon Mount Zion, to wit, not the litteral Zion; but the ”mystical.’

‘“But whereas some Object, How can these 400 pieces of Silver (signifying so many Virtues) be paid to Ephron, the Dust-eater, if Ephron be the Devil, to whom it was said, Dust-shalt thou eat? I Answ. Things spoke by way of Al­legory and Parable, are not strictly to be understood in e­very Circumstance; but the design and intent of the Pa­rable is principally to be minded, as in the parable of Christ concerning the Seed sown in the High-way, which Seed Christ expounded to be the Word, and the Fouls that picked it up to be the Devil; and yet it cannot be said, that the Word of God is the Devils Food; but the design and intent of this Parable is to show, that the Bodies of all Saints, who have these Virtues, signified by 400 Pie­ces of Silver (the Number 400 being produced of 4. ans­wering to the Four elemental Principles or Qualities of the Body) and the Number 10. answering to the Ten Com­mandments [Page 21] of the Law, and that again multiplyed by o­ther Ten, because every one of the Ten Commandments may well be understood to be branched forth into other Ten, are not under the Power nor in the Possession of E­phron, but are the Lords; and that therefore they shall be ”raised up by him to Life Everlasting.’

‘“Now some of the Jews carnally understood, That the Bodies of the faithful, who are true Jews, shall all rise in the outward Land of Israel; and therefore some are earn­est to have their Bones carried thither to be buried; but they are confuted by the more intelligent of their own Writers, called Mysticks, who by the Land of Israel, where all the Saints shall be raised up, do not understand the outward Land of Israel, but another Mystical Land of Israel, whereof that outward Land was but a figure, e­ven that called in Scripture, The Land of the Living, which is that New Earth wherein the Righteous shall dwell; that is no part of this visible Glob, but yet near to it. And that Joseph gave charge concerning his Bones to be carried to the Land of Israel, as outwardly, was but a figure and type, holding forth his Faith concerning the Resurrecti­on of the Dead. Hence it doth appear, that the Graves that shall be opened at the Resurrection of the dead, are not any visible places on this Glob of the Earth, but certain invisible places to our carnal Eyes, where they are lodged by the All-wise disposing Providence, until the time of the Resurrection. And thus commonly men have two Graves, the first given them by men, until the Seperation be made betwixt the Kirnel and the Drossy part, by Putrefaction (as suppose after a Year, or more [Page 22] or less) the Second given them by God, who probably may use the Ministry of Angels therein (see Jude 9.) even as it is said, That Lazarus, after he dyed, was carried into Abrahams Bosom, viz. his Soul, and so, why not also his Body into Abrabam's Sepulchre, mystically under­stood?”’ In p. 115. he would not determine the time; but here he gives a very notable hint at the deep Mystery.

‘“And it is not to be denyed, but as the Seed of Corn that riseth, getteth many additional parts to it of a new Body, whereby it is multiplied into many Grains, so the Resur­rection Body hath also that which is added unto it of that excellent Earth, out of which it ariseth; which is not this visible Earth that we tred upon, but far more excellent; the Dust whereof is Gold, and the Stones of it Saphires, Job 28.6. compar'd with Rev. 2 [...].21. And as the Body of Man at first was made of such excellent Dust, in He­brew call'd Apher or Opher, so it shall be made up again of ”the same.’

Having thus Transcribed his LEARNED Doctrine on this Subject, I shall leave it to the Christian Reader to observe, Consider, and Judge.

1. Whether G. K. hath (as he saith p. 118. ibim) here ‘“delivered and opened [the Doctrine of the RESURRECTI­ON] by plain Evidence of holy Scripture, and in Scrip­ture words and Terms; to which (Saith he) it is onely ”Safe in this and in all other things to keep close?

2. Whether G. K. is not Varied in this Fundamentall since now he is Joynd to the Church of England, which holds not thus concerning the Resurrection?

3. Whether the Scripture be his Rule for these Notions seing he owns it to be the Rule of Faith?

[Page 23]

4. Whether it be generally understood by profes [...] Christi­ans that the Graves that shall be opened at the Resurrection, be not visible places of this Gl [...]ble of the Earth, or that men commonly have two Graves.?

5. Whether the dust that the body of man was at first made, of and shall be made up of again; be not of this visi­ble Earth? or whether it be to be made of Golden dust ac­cording to G. K's. Notion? or whether this Golden dust be such as vulgarly understood, since he hath not told us his mind in that Respect?

6. Do but Seriously Consider, after all the Noise that hath falsly been made against us the Quakers; as if we denyd any Resurrection but what is within, whether G. K. this Great Doctor, this Great Correcter of Errors himself, can, by what he here writes, be clear of such a Notion; since in page 115. he speakes of the Burying-place, which was Mysteriously figured by the Burying-place that Abraham purchased, where none but those who have 400 virtues shall be buried, which is said to be at the End of Ephron's Field, and that those who have not that Burying place, an untimely birth is better than he.? And quere whether G. K. himself hath 400 virtues, that is thus given to Change, or wheth­er an untimely birth be not better than he, by Just Conse­quence, for want of virtue.

Now observe, he adds it's no such misery nor unhap­piness not to have an OUTWARD and visible Sepulchre, which many of the dear Children of God never had; but (saith he) sure they have this other more excellent buriall in the Misticall Land of Israel; where all the dead bodies of the Saints shall be Raised up; Therefore'tis evident (ac­cording [Page 24] to G. K.) That tho' many of the Children of God have not had an Outward & visible buriall; yet they have had a more excellent and Mysticall buriall in the Mysticall Land of Israel; where also they shall be Raised, and that it is not an outward and visible one. In short what can be in­serted from hence, but that it is an Inward and Invisible buriall, where there shall also be an Inward and Invisible RESURRECTION. This is so very Misty Misticall, that One might have thought he had written this Inadvertantly; had he not Confirm'd it below, where he seems to Censure some Jews as being Carnall; for that they Carnally, under­stood that the Bodies of the faithfull shall rise in the Out­ward Land of Israel; and saith they are confuted by the more intelligent or their own Writers call'd Mysticks, who by the Land of Israel, where all the Saints shall be raised, do not understand the OUTWARD Land of Israel; but another Mys;ticall, whereof the outward was but a Figure: Now since he deems it carnall in these Jews, to understand it of the outward Land of Israel, where the Saints are to be raised, and that thay were Confuted therein; what can be more naturally inferred from hence? (since he accounts to understand it of the outward is Confutable); but that to understand it of the Inward and Mysticall, is both Spiritu­all and unconfutable.

This is the Man, that would be accounted the great Corrector of Errors in other men; but as for himself he is (Strange Confidence!) always found in Fundamentalls. Monstrum Horrendum! This is the man on whom Doctor Bray in his Printed Letter Prodigally Squanders this Epithet viz. The Excellent Mr. Keith. Telling the World how the [Page 25] field is Sown here (in Pensilvania &c.) by him. But O [...] what a miserable Crop must needs be expected from such Confused Miscellaneus seed, since where the wind is sown, the Whirl-Wind onely is reaped. The Increase or Crop of this Seed may probably well deserve Thrassing; but it's Scarce worthy of grinding.

Here reminding what I have said before Intituling G. K. to the Revolution Whimsies, I might expect his reprimand, but that I am so well provided with proof, that he may rather blush and be silent, till he has either come to anoth­er Revolution himself, or brought his now brethren (if it were Possible) over to the same Imaginations; For besides what he hath Couched of this Stuff in his books, in the Years 89. & 90. and besides what he knows an honest friend, and once an Intimate of his, affirmed to his face; that G. K. told him at New-York, (to this purpose) that he believed. God would lay it upon him to Preach the Revolution Doct­rine; and besides his implicit acknowledgement in pag. 2. of Truth and Innocency▪ That he was concerned in Writing that Revolution-book, call'd the 200 Queries; I say, be­sides all this, I shall here acquaint him, what a very Intel­ligent person, yet living, who at first followed G. K. in his Seperation, did severall Years ago, among other things, give upon occasion under his hand, which take as follow­eth, viz. That he once discoursing with G. K. one point they had in hand, was, how God would save the Heathen, that never heard of Christ &c. And what would become of Infants, and such as were Deaf, Dumb, and not capable of Instruction; Seing they Laid it dowd for Doctrine, that no Salvation was Perfected without an outward Confession to the [Page 26] the Faith of Christ &c. To which G. K. reply'd, that he had always distinguisht betwixt Salvation begun, and Sal­vation perfected; and added, that the Doctrine of the Revo­lutions, would put an end to that, and many other things, then disputable; But that it was not time yet, the World was not ready to receive it, but it was a coming on — Also that G. K. told him from Ephes: 1. [...]0. That Paul there mentions the Redemption of all the World, both V [...]gitab­les and Animals &c. Then said the Friend, we must hinge it upon the Revolutions: then G. K. Smiled, and said, we need not be so blunt; for when they tax me with it, I can shift it and say, Its RATIONALL: But I never made i [...] an Article of my Faith. I [...]e tell thee, said G. K. its Ra­tionall enough, that Spirits revolve into bodies again, otherwise many things that were acted by such, as were the people of God, could not be Warranted, neither could the Scriptures be true; then named some seeming difficult places of Scripture; But concluded, that this Doctrine would make all agree. Much more might be it st [...]n;c'd; but here is enough, to show, that it was not without grounds, that I have loaded G. K. with these Revolution Notions; and its very questionable, whether an itch to bring forth these Notions to the World: (That he might be the Parent of some new sect to be call'd by his Name;) was not the true ground, of what he call'd often the main matter of Controversie with us here, as aforesaid, and which Spurr'd him so fast on, to press so hard upon us, to own the universall necessity of the knowledge and Faith of Christ witbout us, his Death, Sufferings &c. So that none that ever had lived in any age, from the Foundation of the World, [Page 27] either Jew or Consciencious Heathen, or other Infidel, nor any Deaf or Dumb person, nor Infant could be saved, without that Faith and Knowledge; and yet could not perish; though they dyed in a State without it. Se 200. Queries pa. 40. and his Catechism pa. 8.

G. K. an APOSTAT.

Having destroy'd G. K's Foundation of vain glorying, as not changing or varying in Fundamentalls, by clear de­monstrations that he hath varied, and fixed also upon him his dim Divinations or Revolutionism, I now proceed to give the World that of G. K. which he hath sometimes seemd to require, when he hath been call'd an Apostat: I mean a proof of his Apostacy, which he hath been exceed­ing loath to own; and which hath ever been a most of fencive and ungratefull Epithet to him, (tho' due) where ever he hath met with it: From which his votaries and Abettors also, have with all the skill they could advance, endeavoured to shrowd him, as a thing so Ignominious, that if duely provd; it were enough to ruine his and their wicked, and impossible design, of rendering the Quakers no Christians, and worse than Heathens; thereby to Sub­ject us to the hatred and Persecution of all people.

But now to the matter. Let it first be premised, that in all reason, nothing ought to conclude and satisfie G. K. and his Adherents more in the Case, than his own difinition what an Apostat is, and his own Practice to prove him such an Apostat; and then I shall prove both one and t'other.

In his Exact Narrative pa. 45. he saith, that a Stranger, at one of his Meetings at Turners-Hall, said, That to Apo­statize, [Page 28] is to Apostatize from the Whole Faith; but I find G. K. himself in his Way Cast up pa. 43. 57. 171. to be of another mind, Charging the Church of Rome, as also the Presbyterian Church, to be Apostatized; and yet we know, neither of them is Apostatiz'd from the whole Faith. Also in his said Narrat. p. 15. he appears to be of another mind, where he places the Apostacy upon a mans being Changed in ANY (note any) Fundamentall Principle; for saith he, if you cannot prove me, to have changed in any Fundamentall Principle, ye ought not to charge me to be an Apostat; well then by the rule of Contraries, since I have prov'd him [as before] to have changed, not onely in ONE but in DIVERS Principles, acknowledged by himself to be Fundamentalls; therefore by his own Argu­ments, he must needs be an Apostat. And here note ' [...]is very probable, that the great indeavours G. K. hath used, to make the World believe, he hath not, from the begin­ning, varied Fundamentalls, was [...]o the end, he might not be charged with the due, tho' Odious & Ignominious Epithet of Apostat; but all his Covers are not able to hide him, from us that so well know him to be an Apostate; not onely from the Doctrines which once he held and Preached, Writt for, and for which he dis [...]nted; but also from the Meak and Peaceable Spirit of the Lord Jesus, into Envy and Rage, per­verting divers Writings, and sayings of our Friends, Im­posing his own Sense upon them, and that sense upon the World, to the utter offending and stumbling of some a­gainst the way of Truth it self, in revenge to its followers.

Again in his preface to Help in time of Need And in pa. 24, 25, 26. of the same book, He charges some Presby­terians, [Page 29] for being (shamefully degenerated, and declined, from what they had (them), but late themselves so zeal­ously ascerted and maintained, to be the Work of God, which they had shuck from, and turn'd like the dog to the vomit, were not (Saith he) set forms of Prayer Cry'd down also in Scotland; as Lifeless barren things, and the service bo [...] Deny'd? and now (saith he) have ye not licked up the Vomit? and have not your Brethren in England taken it up again? and when it is offered to you to read, will you not also do the Like? There is no question but most of you will, and worse also when you are put to the Tryall.

‘Now have ye not Apostatiz'd herein also, and mixed “your selves with the Prophane Rabble of the World? And ye can Pray and Sing and Communicate with such, [...]is ”not this Babylon indeed, which is to say Confusion?’

First, for a short digression, Note these Words [Worse also] what is that Worse than the Common Prayer here meant; but the M [...]ss-Book, and if it was not uncharitable in G. K. to suspect such worse things of them, from his presumption onely, that they would follow their brethren in England, when try'd, to Lick up the vomit, viz of set forms of Prayer, and the Service book? I thinck his ought not to count it uncharitable now, if some cannot but sus­pect such things of him if he should be tryed, he having, actually Licked up those things again, he once had vomited.

Now Observe, If taking up set forms of Prayer, Service Book &c. Rendred the Presbyterians Apostats(as saith G. K. it did) then if G. K. hath done so too, G. K. from his own Mouth must be an Apostate. But G. K. hath so done therefore from his own Mouth he is an Apostat.

[Page 30]But that which yet further renders G. K. an Apostat out of his own mouth, is, what he delivered to his Auditory, in the Barbados house in Philadelphia, about the time of his going for England, which was to this purpose viz. That if they should hear (after his arrivall in England) that he Preached amongstt he Independants or Presbyterians, they ought not to call him an Apostat for that; but if ever he put on the Canonicall-Robe (that is Priests Gown) then they should call G. K. an Apostat; And to others in parti­cular G. K. hath said that if ever he turn'd to the Church of England, then they might call him an Apostat.

To summ up the matter in short, and so come to a Conclu­sion; since a man may be an Apostat, tho' he doth not A­postatise from the Whole Faith, and since G. K's Chang­ed in divers Fundamentall Principles, and Joyned to those that use set Forms of prayer, and the Service book, And since he is become a Preacher of the Church of England, and put on the Canonicall-Robe (all which G. K. himself hath given us as marks of an Apostat); Therefore G. K. is prov'd out of his own mouth to be an Apostate, and ought not to be angry for the future, with such as may give him that Charracter.

Having thus Established G. K. under his due Disigna­tion of Apostat. It now falls in my way to Justify our dear and honourable Friend W. P. against the unworthy Sug­gestions and Insinuations of G. K. and other Cancer'd and hardned Apostats, so often reiterated against him on purpose to defame him, and us with him, viz. That he hath said. ‘“That the outward Person that Suffered is properly the Son ”of God, we utterly deny, This hath been fully answered [Page 31] to other Adversaries (of whom G. K. is Chiefly a Copy) but [...]east some in those Parts (among whom G. K. upon his Stage, may have renewed that Charge against W. P.) may not have seen any such Answers, I shall bestow a little further Pains about it, for their Information.

It's clear by some following words of W. P. that he meant it onely of Christ's outward body; where he saith ‘a Body “hast thou prepared me Said the Son to the Father) So the ” Son was not the Body tho' the Body was the Sons, And ind [...]d if that outward body (abstractly was the So [...] then God by that Body made the Worlds; for by the Son its said, God made the Worlds Heb. 1.2.11.3. And was not he the Son of God that was before Abraham was? And was he not Glorify'd with the Father before the World began? But we do not read that the outward body was before the World began, nor before Abraham: For in the fullness of Time he was made of a Woman, of Seed of Abraham, after the Flesh and was then and is also God, blessed for Ever. And we also find, that Christ himself distinguisht be­tween himself & his Body Mat. 26.12. But to show that W. P. tho' he did not believe the Son of God, to be strictly Limited to that outward body, (so prepared for him of the Father, as aforesaid); yet in the same place it's Clear W. P. owned the same Christ that Suffered, to be the true Son of God in these words viz. He that Laid down his Life, and “Suffered his Body to be Crucify'd by the Jews, without the ”Gates of Jerusalem, is Christ the Son of the Most high God.

And in pa. 49. W. P. very fully expresseth his and our belief again in these Words, viz.— ‘We do believe in One “holy God Allmighty, who is an Eternal, Spirit; the Crea­tor [Page 32] of all things, and in One Lord Jesus Christ, him one­ly Son; and Express Image of his Substance, who took u­pon him flesh, and was in the World, and in Life, Doctrine, Miracles, Death, Resurrection, Assention, and Medeation, perfectly did, and does continue to do the Will o [...] God, To whose holy Life, Power, Media­tion and Blood, we ONELY ascribe our Sanctification, Justification, Redemption and perfect Salvation; and we believe in one Holy Spirit, that proceeds and breaths from the Father and the Son, as the Life and Virtue, both of the Father and the Son; a Measure of which is given to all to profit with; and he that hath one hath all, for these Three are One, who is the Alpha and Omega, the ”first and the last, God over all Blessed for ever.’

But above all men, I thinck G. K. should not throw this at W. P. as if he here deny'd the Son of God, consi­dering what he hath Writ in his Way Cast up pa. 102. Thus, ‘“We have as good cause to believe him to be true and reall Man, before his outward birth in the flesh, as after; for it is not the Outward flesh and blood that is the Man; But it's the Soul or Inward man, that is the man most ”properly; such as Christ was from the beginning.’

Again in pa. 104. he Saith ‘Let all the Scripture “be Searcht out and it shall not be found, that Christ be­came Man; and took to himself the Soul of man, at his conception, in the Womb of the Virgin Mary; but ONE­LY that he took flesh, and was the Son of Mary David, and Abraham, according to the flesh; but according to his heavenly Nature, even as Man, he was the Son of God, and was the Father and Lord of all the Faithfull, [Page 33] ”in all Ages; the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father &c. Here it is clear, that according to G. K. himself (who saith he was allways found in Fundamentalls), that it is not the Outward flesh and blood, but the Soul or Inward man that dwells in the outward flesh, that is the Man most proper­ly: Surely then if not the Outward, that is the man most Properly, that is not the Outward, that is the Son of God most Properly.

And since he saith, it was according to his Heavenly Nature, that he was the Son of God; and that he was the Father and Lord of all the Faithfull, in all Ages; the Mighty God, Everlasting Father &c. Surely all this could not be said Properly of his Outward Person, as he was the Son of Abraham and David, according to the Flesh, onely.

As for what he so moch Objects as if Friends G. F. and Fr. Howgill should say; they were Equall with God; this also hath been Answered very often, Particularly by G. W. but three years ago, in his Truth and Innocency pa. 9, 10. The Answer is large; I shall therefore cite some of it, thus: The Charge against G. F. was that he had said; He that hath the same Spirit, that raised up Jesus Christ is Equall with God, Souls Errand p. 8.

To this G. W. Answers, ‘We deny the Words as there “ Printed, to be according to G. F's Sense, or Ours, which is, That the Holy Ghost and the Son is Equall with the Fa­ther, ”in Power and Glory; then if any come to Witness the Holy Ghost, they come to Witness that which is Equall in Power and Glory, with the Father &c. And that G. F. being Charged with it, Posatively deny'd the Charge; but confessed, that the Father and the Son are one; and [Page 34] that Christ and the Holy Ghost, are Equall with God; and the words [He that hath] should be Left out, as bring contrary to G. F's and Our Principle; and to his own ve­ry words and Confession, a little before in the same book, where he posatively denies the Charge.

And as for F. H's words pa. 232. of his Workes, he is thus quoted; ‘He that is joyned to the Lord is one “ Spirit there is Ʋnity; and the unity stands in Equality it Self; where the Son is Revealed, and speaks, the Father speaks in him, and dwells in him, and he in the ” Father. To which (as G. W. saith) here the Equality is placed between the Father and Son, as the union be­tween him, and them, who are joyned to the Lord in Spirit, and live and Dwell in that Spirit, which is Equall, where is then the Blasphemy? Se Christ's Prayer John 17.21. That they all may be one, as thou Father art in me, and I in thee; that they may be also One in us.

Again says G. W. The equality in nature [Objected] re­ [...]es to the Divine nature, which every Child of God par­takes of in measure, Se 2 Peter [...]: 4.

And of the Words [Tho' not Stature] G. W. also Says, they relate to the Child THAT Divine Nature, is one and unchangeable; but our participating of it, and growth in it is Graduall, untill all Christ's whole Church and Body, come unto the measure of the Stature, and fullness of Christ Ephe [...]. 4.12.13. and he there denys an Equality between the Saints and him that Created and renewed them; and tho Perfect in Holyness and Righteousness, is required and believed of all [...] and Faithfull Christians in Christ Jesus; yet (saith he), we do not pretend to the Infinite fullness of [Page 35] Wisdom and Knowledge, as it is in God and Christ, or to his manifold Wisdom; but to a Degree of Divine Wisdom, and understanding, according as his Spirit reveals it to us; and we capable to receive it, which is therefore Perfectly true, and certain, in every measure and degree thereof. I have rather Chose to Cite our Ancient Friend G. W's words, because, as he there Saith, They who were con­versant with those deceased Friends, when living, have more right to interpret their Words, to such an Evangel­licall Sense as they knew they intended, than their Adver­saries have to Charge them, with Blasphemous Principles from their own partiall, minced, mangled, and boken quotations &c And that this Previledge cannot be deny'd by G. K. here what he said, when he was clearer from Prejudice than now he is, in his Serious Appeal, in An­swer to Cotton Mather pa. 7. Thus, ‘It may have hapned “to some among us, to have, at times, in Writing or speak­ing, delivered things not so warily or Cautiously word­ed, in every respect, as need were; But in this Case, all but Prejudiced Persons will say, if it can be found, by Comparing their Words one with another, that their Sense and Meaning is found, tho' not alltogether so Safe­ly or Cautiously Worded in every respect, Charity is to be allowed, and the best Construction ought to be given to their Words, or they themselves or Friends for them, in respect of their absence or Decease, who did best know them ought to be allowed to give their sence of them; For tho' we affirm, that the Spirit of God [...] us and all be­lievers, in every discovery gives [...]is Infallible; yet we ”have he Judged [...] In [...]allible &c.’ Thus [Page 36] far G. K. And as when he was here Writing, in defence of the Truth, of our Principles; which he is now Writing against; he then allowed (before he had lost his Charity), that Charity is to be allowed, and the best Construction, is to be put upon our deceased or absent Friends words, by them who did best know them; And it is to be observed, that in that very book he hath himself clear'd G. F. from the Imputation of Blasphemy, he now Charges upon him; both about being equall with God, and about the Soul; His Words are thus, to Cotton Mather pa. 60. ‘And where­as “he would in the Conclusion fix it upon G. F. that he thought himself equall with God, and that the Soul of man was God or a part of him, W. P. hath Sufficiently vindicated G. F. and also G. F. hath cleared it in his, book, that he did Witness, both the Son and the Holy Spirit revealed in him, who are Equall with God the Fa­ther, as he takes notice of the Westminster confession, acknowledgment. And what G. F. speaks of the Soul as being a part (but more properly, a measure of the Spirit) of God; he doth not understand it of the Soul of man, that is essenciall to man, but of the Divine Soul or Spirit in man or to Speak with the Scriptu [...], the Soul of God, as it is Written; if any draw back my Soul shall ”have no pleasure in him &c.’

Now here we se that G. K. in his better days, hath cleared G. F both from his owning himself to be equall with God, and that the Soul of man that's essentiall to him, as man, was any part or measure of God; And I really believe it may be truely said of our Religion, as G. K. said to Cotton Mather, in the same page, viz. ‘Blessed [Page 37] “be God; our Religion is not that, as he would make it to be, nor are we such as he discribeth, and it is great question to me, if he doth really thinck those things, that he saith of us, to be true, either in Generall, or in Particular; and if he doth nor thinck so, the greater is ”his Sin;’ Thus saith G. K. and therefore let him look to it now; and indeed I cannot thinck G. K. believes in his heart, that G. F. whom he once said, was safe in the hand of him, that holds the Seven Golden Candlesticks Rector Corrected pa. [...] did ever in the least esteem of him­self, as that he was equall with God, neither did the Saints of Old so esteem themselves▪ tho' they spoke of their be­ing made partakers of the Divine Nature; And tho' they said, he that hath this hope in him, purifieth himself e­ven as He is pure. And tho', they said, as He is, so are we in this World. And that tho', they had an unction from the Holy one, whereby they knew all things; yet I do not believe, they thought (no more do we) that they were as God is, in the fullness of Wisdom, nor as God is, in Great­ness, Glory, Omnipresence, Omniciency, and Omnipoten­cy, with others his Great and Glorious Attributes; for Blessed be the Lord, he hath made us (in measure) Sensi­ble that before him, all Nations are but as the drop of a B [...]k [...]rt, or as the small dust of the Ballance: And tho' in his Serious Call &c. He Charges the Quakers Indifinitely, of thinking themselves Equall with God, yet I hardly thinck, that he is so Extraordinarily blinded with Preju­dice, as to believe, that if all the Quakers in the World, (who have their naturall Senses) were asked, (and he saith there cannot be reckoned in England and Wales less than [Page 38] 150000. Old and Young,) besides what's in other Places Se his Quakers Politicks pa. 16) expressly, one by one, and privetly, whether they did esteem themselves to be equall with God; but that they would one by one deny it, with great detestation, and utter abhorrency; Even as we are informed by the now Living, that when G. F. was asked, whether he owned Himself to be Equall with God; he Cry'd out, as abhorring the thing: Geo: Fox dust and Ashes! Geo: Fox dust and Ashes!

Some few things more, yet further to Demonstrate, the further Confusion and Falshood of this hardned Apostat, and then for this time to have done with him.

It's no Secrete in the parts of America, between Piscatuay and Philadelphia, where he hath travelled in his work of E [...]y, what accusations (tho' False) he hath openly brought against the Magistrates of Pensilvania; as if before he went for England, they would have Try'd him for his Life, and also have taken it: (O! Murdering Envy and Falshood!) if the Government had not been happily Chang­ed upon the very Juncture as a Miracle for his Diliverance; nor hath his self opposing Pen, been formerly less indust­rious, tho' to as little advantage on his side, with those that thought it worth their while to observe it; some In­stances whereof accept as followeth.

In his Exact Narr. pa. 40. he insinuates as if the Pro­secution of him in Pensilvania, would have been for his en­deavouring to alter the Government; and that they would have found him guilty, and put him to Death, if the Go­vernment had not in the mean time been Changed. But, in Oposition to this; in his Quakers Politicks p. 20. (which [Page 39] might have been more fitly styled G. K's Perswasions to Persecution) and Blood-shed; he Saith, it was for Telling them, That by taking the Sloop from the Privetiers &c. they had Transgressed (as they would make the World be­lieve), then known Principle, against Fighting, That he was Presented by a Grand Jury. Alexander Beards [...]ey Foreman, and the rest also mostly Quakers; at a Session held by Quaker Justices, in the year 1692. to be found guilty of a Capitall Crime; in order to be Tryed for his Life a Month after; but that by the Wonderfull Providence of God, that wrought his deliverance, they were turn'd out of the Government, before the Month Expired; But again in Reasons for renouncing Quakerism pa. 24. (which in his Plain Discovery pa. 6. he saith, he can well enough stand to Justifie) it's said, it was for his saying: 1st. That Christ's body Rose out of the Grave: 2ly. That it was Law­full to Pray to Jesus Christ Crucifyed; and 3ly. That the best Saints had need allways to come to God by the Me­dea [...]er the Man Christ Jesus; And that for these things, they Excommunicated him, first and afterwards; present­ed him by a Grand-Jury at Philadelphia; and that they would have found him Guilty of Death, if the Govern­ment had not been taken our of their hands: So that we se, that though he hath published so many Evidences against us; yet these Evidences do not agree: But that which is yet more observable is that he should be so Infatuated, as to publish such Falshoods, as by the words of the Present­ment it self, Published by him and themselves here, plain­ly appears. The words of which Presentment, in their book called New-Englands Spirit &c. pa. 24. and printed [Page 40] with the Tryall it self, is, as followeth: ‘We of the “ Grand Jury, do present, George Keith and Tho. Budd, as Authors of a Book, Intituled The Plea of the Inno­cent; where in page 3. about the Latter end of the same, they t [...]e said G. K. and Tho. Budd, defamingly accuse Samuell Jennings, (he being a Judge and a Magistrat of this Province) of being too High, and Imperious, in Worldly Courts, calling him Impudent, Presumteous, and Insolent man, greatly Exposing his Reputation, and of an ill Precedent, and contrary to the Law in that Case made, ”and Provided.

Now in the relation of the matter, above cited by G. K. &c. there are these following Falshoods, and false insinu­ations; First, by their saying the presentment made Would have been Prosecuted, if the Government had not been Changed; whereas the Presentment was Prosicuted and brought to Judgment; and that long before the Change of Government; and he onely was Fined five Pounds, which never was, nor (I suppose) never would have been exacted, if the Government had not been Changed.

Again he saith, he had been accused for endeavoring to alter the Government, which was Capitall by their Law, and that they would have found him Guilty of Death, if they had not been turn'd out of the Government.

In which are these falshoods, and false insinuations. For First, in the presentment, he was not accused for indea­vouring to alter the Government, for there was in the pre­sentment nothing like it, nor Secondly, had we any Law that made it Capitall: But that they WOULD have found him guilty of Death; a more Wicked, Malicious, and [Page 41] False ascertion G. K. could hardly have Invented, against those then in Government. Surely, I may say of him (as he told Tho: Ellw [...]d) that he is Apostatized from Common Honesty, as well as from divers of his own Acknowledg'd Fundamentals of Christianity.

Again a little further to show G. K's Persecuting Spirit, we find, that because our Friends in England, have not so taken upon Trust, all that G. K. hath Printed, con­cerning the taking of the Sl [...]op, as to condemn those Friends concerned therein; he takes advantage thereby, to vent his very great Enmity and Prejudice against us, and to stir up the PEACEABLE GOVERNMENT at home to PERSECUTION. For, [...]ays he in his said Politicks pa. 28. ‘What Security has the Civil Government; but “when they thinck [...]i [...]t, and apprehend they are animated, BY THE SPIRIT So to do; but that they may make use of the Sword, considering their Numbers, Wealth, Politicks, and Methods of correspondency, to carry on ”their Designes.

O Envyous Scoffer! O Murdering Spirit! what havock wouldst thou make upon the Earth, amongst an Innocent and Peaceable People? who ever have and still do live quietly in the Land, and for whom the Lord Jesus; through his Eternall Love, laid down his holy Life, and shed his most precious blood, as well as for others; But thou art Limited and Restrained, and that may be part of thy torment; and, we hope, thy Wicked desires will never be answered: And we both pray for and hope, greater filicity to our Native Land, than tha [...] [...]ver her Ru­lers shall take Council, of such a Cruell [...]diary

[Page 42]Next he hath, in p. 36. 37. Published and abstract of a Letter sent him (he Pretends) from [his thorough paced peevish Procelite] R. B. giving (as in pa. 30.) he saith, a farther account of the Quakers Politicks; where the said R. B. speaking of the generall Collections, made by our Friends, for severall Services; confesses, they are made as there is a Seasonable Motive to Charity, and after he hath told something of the way, and manner of Collecting, those Charitable Contributions, he tells, that the motives for the (then) two last Generall Collections, was, the Distress in Ireland in the Late Warrs, and the late Scarcity of Food in Scotland; upon which last motive (Saith he) and the ge­nerall Service of Truth, the generall Collection rose high, And after having made such Observations as he thincks fit, upon those our Christian and truely Charitable practices, (which he maliciously calls Policies) he most envyously makes this use of it: As if it were dangerous to the Govern­ment, in these words, viz. ‘And it may also with Rea­son “be Suggested, That should they be Suffered, or Tolle­rated in their Policies; it may by degrees occasion a Con­vulsion ”both in Church and State &c. Behold what Spirit of Persecution appears with open face, in these Brethren in Iniquity! What Worse or more Malicious Suggestions did the Jesuits and Fryers in France Suggest to that King, against the poor Protestants there; But thanks be to God (the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, the onely Ruler of Princes,) who hath Graciously inclined, the hearts of our Superi­ours, to a more Christian moderation towards us, and all others their Consciencious Protestant Subjects, than those Julian like Apostats would have them to use; and we have [Page 43] still great Cause, to be thankfull to Allmighty God, who has [...]o preserved us in our Christian Testimony, that tho' those envyous Apostats, and Back-sliders, above all others, would render us Obnoctious, and Dangerous to the Go­vernment we live under; yet they can Prove no greater matter against us, than the Maintaining or Continuing our Christian care, to promote Piety, Charity, and real Christ­ianity, amongst us.

And how can it be any thing but bitter Enmity and Ma­lice, in this G. K. above all Men, thus basely to insinuate against us? because he having been among us so many years, and as an Elder, concerned in those Meetings too? cannot but know in his Conscience, how innocently (and Inofencinly to the Government) those Meetings are kept and managed.

Again in Plain Discovery pa. 25. It's still farther evi­dent, that G. K. is earnest to stirr up the Magistrates to persecute us; tho' the Name of Persecution, is so Odious among men, to be sure he is not willing to own it; yet since he is so really and openly for the thing, he must not be peevish, if I tell him of it; for see what here he saith in plain Words, viz. ‘What the Quakers call Persecution, “I mean some COERTION and RESTRAINT, that should be used upon their TEACHERS, by the CIVIL MA­GISTRATE.”’

Again, If the Civil Authority should PUNISH Them, and use some OUTWARD COERTION, by HINDRING their PREACHING in PUBLICK ASSEMBLIES; and PRINTING, it would be no PERSECUTION; No George! no Persecution, for all this? Here the Serpent shows [Page 44] his Sting, and Spits his Venom; but all in vain; for the first he must draw back into his own mouth, from whence it came; and the Latter, does but infect his own Bowe [...]ls. Are not COERTION and RESTRAINT some of the Tools of the Inquisition? When thou metst with these things at Aberdene, and afterwards at London; thou then thoughtst them Persecution, which if thou hadst escaped in thy own Countrey, Some are ready to thinck, thou hadst no [...] so soon left it, nor troubled us so soon here from England.

And may not these words PUNISH THEM Compre­hend all the various ways of Punishment and Tortures, men­tion'd in the Books of Martyrs? or practiced in the Inquisi­tion, whether Dungeons, cutting of throats, Grid-Irons, or other Punishments whatsoever? and which is yet more Cruell than the Grave? our breath must be stopt, and our voice not heard to Complain; and those means taken away whereby to Discover the Persecutor If not Murderer: we must neither Preach nor Print It seems; and then G. K. might have the more scope to abuse us at pleasure; and go on in his Lies, false Accusations, and, Slanders undetected, and without Contradiction.

And we understand that G. K, is of the same wicked mind still, if not worse and worse; And more and more Presumteous, Imperious, Insolent, and unreasonable; as appears by this following relation sent from Road-Island: viz. ‘On the 6th. day of the 6. mo. the said G. K. with “one Miles, and another call'd Ministers of the Church of England. came to our new Meeting-house, and took a place, and sat down in time of Meeting, being the First day of the Week: After some time our Friend E. S. stood [Page 45] up and Declared, which was to the Comfort and Edifica­tion of the Meeting in Generall, and after his Testimony was ended, the said G. K. stood up, and said, That [...]. S. had spoken many good Truths; but mixed with Error. Reply was made, That we desired to enjoy our Meetings, [...]ceably (not being yet ended); and if he or they had any thing to offer AFTERWARDS the House should be [...] to him, and as many as would, might hear him; but he still pressed for audience, and being in a Turbulent frame, called to the Governour in a Command­ing way to ORDER that he might be heard; and that the AUDITORY might BE COMPELLED TO STAY and HEAR HIM; or else HE WOULD COMPLAIN to the QUEEN of him. Thus pressing the matter, answer was made him; that the House was our Own, and we ought not to be Disturbed: Then he Pretended, he had as much to do there as we; Then we desired to se his Pow­er; upon which he again call'd to the Justices, that they might Compell the People: The Justices answer was, The Deputy Governour was there; Then he applyed himself to him, who told G. K. That it was our Previledge to Enjoy our Meetings Peaceably and agreeable to that Con­stitution, where all had enjoyed that favour near Sixty Years. Notwithstanding G. K. persisted in his abusive Reflections: So that our Meeting was finally disturbed by him. And two days after, when G. K. with others went to the Governours, house, and there read that which he called his Power from the Bishop I suppose of London) it prov'd onely a Letter of Recomendation; the Summ whereof was, that Mr. K. had been an Instrument to [Page 46] bring many Souls to God, and desired he might be kindly treated in these parts: And yet G. K. had still the Confi­dence to continue his applycations to the Governour, to force the Way to the Meeting-house, and to order that he might have a hearing there; G. K. pretending he could Open or Lock up our doors as he Pleased; but the Gover­nour absolutely Refused to gratify him therein; saying, he would do nothing by force: Then he desired the Gover­nours Leave that the Justices might Assist him: which he also prudently Refused; but at last Granted him Leave, to ”meet in the Court-house.’

Thus G. K. at Newport on Road-Island, besides all the rest of his Disturbances of our peaceable Meetings there, and on other parts of the Island, and likewise in New-Eng­land, Long-Island, and of our Yearly-Meeting at Shrews­bury, in East-Jersey, and tho' he came not himself to that Meeting yet he severall times sent a rash Praecipitant person (who by his garb looked like a Minister of the Church of England,) to read certain abusive manuscripts, which he did severall days Successively, in the time of our Worship; and also told us, that he did not know, but that he had as much Right there as we; In the reading of one of which Manuscripts, the said Person, in G. K's name, made use of the name of the QUEEN and Nobility of England to us, (as G. K. himself did afterwards in words on another oc­casion) pretending to be of their Religion, the better (as some thought) on the one hand to awe us, and on the o­ther to Magnifie himself in the view of the People. But what Point soever G. K. aim'd at in all these things, yet I can fully distinguish, between the Religion, and Christi­an [Page 47] Clemency of the Queen, Nobles, and Commons of Eng­land, who have graciously, under God, continued to Tolerate us, in the free excercise of our Religion, and the A­postacy of G. K. and Irreligion of him and his Abettors, who would move Persecution and Distruction against us. May the council of the True God ever be with the Queen, and Government of England, and all their Advisers; and then we fear not at all what G. K. and envy can hatch against us, with respect either to our Liberty, Property, or Reli­gion; but rather hope, for a just reprimand upon G. K. for his audacious use of the Queens Name; (and some thinck without Her knowledge in his Illegall and Turbu­lent treatment of us, in our Religious and peaceable Meet­ings, in times of our Worship of the True and Living God, if Complaint shall be made to the Queen, of these his abuses and proceedings, since his arrivall in America; For doth not G. K. in all these things greatly mistake, and abuse the tender and Christian disposition of the Queen, towards her peaceable people, and the Genious, and Temper of her Government at Large? that is for gently Ruling and Govern­ing, not rigerously Destroying or Disturbing her Subjects, either by Punishing them, to gratifie the devouring Spirit of Persecuting G. K. or Forcing them to hear him with such others as come, not to preach the Gospell of Peace, but to Disturb them, contrary to the Statutes and Government of Her Kingdom of England.

And doth not G. K. with his fellow Disturbers, and Peace-breakeing Ministers of the Church of England, also abuse the Bishop of London? by using these Letters of Recomen­dation beyond their due Limits? and under that pretext [Page 48] and as Ministers of the Church of England; abusing the Queens Subjects in their Religio [...]s, and peaceable Meetings? And doth not G. K. reproach the Religion of the Queen, Lords, Commons, and Magistrates, of England? to say they are of the same Religion with him, That would use COER­TION and RESTRAINT upon our Teachers, HINDER our PREACHING in PUBLICK and our PRINTING; and PUNISH us? and not onely thus; but would have them ORDER for himself a hearing; and COMPELL the PEO­PLE to HEAR HIM: And LOCK up and OPEN our Meet­ing-House-Doors at Pleasure; and so by all these doings Invade our Liberty, Property and RELIGION: But we are assured through the great Mercy of God, this is not the QUEEN & Nobilities Religion, nor the Religion nor Incli­nation of the Magistrates or people in generall; But of G. K who may Justly be st [...]led a Son of Ap [...]llyon the Destroyer.

Now if it be true (as he has Suggested to render us dan­gerous to the Government), that there is 150000 of Ʋs in England and Wales, besides what may be in other parts of the Queens Dominions; then he must needs be very unrea­sonable to Imagine the Government should become Executi­oner of his privet revenge upon so great a multitude; the generality of whom, if not every Soul of them come to the years of discretion, may be more Serviceable in the Common Wealth by their labour and Indo [...]stry, than him­self, whose greatest employ seems to be in vain J [...]rgling and Fruitless Contention.

And now to conclude, whereas on the one hand G. K. does so often tell us, that we are unsound in Fundament­alls, and on the other hand we say we know not any one [Page 49] Principle of the Christian Faith, that we are not sound in; & since those things which some may esteem Fundamentalls; others esteem none, as G. K. in his Serious Appeal told Cotton M [...]ther, that they did not hold all Our Fundamentals; and also saith, That the Priests in New-England hold 12 particu­lar false Doctrines, and that some of them are Fundamentall; But doth not tell which of them are so▪ s [...] Pre [...]b. and Indep. p. 204. 215. It may therefore (one would thinck) highly concern G. K. in order to prevent any from thinking they hold all the Fundamentalls, before they do, to sho [...] what all those matters of Faith and Doctrine are, which he himself calls Fundamentalls, and prove them to be such (and so ne­cessary as he makes them) by the Holy Scriptures which he himself calls the Rule. With this Caution, to be sure to be Consistant with himself, and his now brethren, as well as with the Scriptures, about them; and then he may publish something to prove, if he can, that we do not hold all those Fundamentalls.

And as for meeting with G. K. at his peremptory Su­mons from time to time, in order to dispute him, that we look upon as an Inposition, no ways obigatory upon us, as also very unreasonable. First, because the Apostle saith: ‘If “thou hast any thing against thy brother, tell him of it, between him and thee, and if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy Brother; if he hear thee not, take two or three with thee, that in the mouth of two or three Wit­nesses, every word may be Establised; and if he will not hear, then tell the Church, and if he will not hear ”the Church; let him be unto thee as an Heathen man, and Publicain▪ Again, ‘An Heritick after the first or Second [Page 50]Admoniti [...] [...] knowing that such, is Condemned of ”himself.’ And since G. k. hath also himself in his Presb. and Indep. pa. 212. Writ to the like purpose▪ viz. ‘I do “not find (saith he) any Command or practice in all the Scrip­ture, for you to decline a fair dispute with men, suppose Heriticks or false Teachers, UNLESS you have FIRST DEALT with THEM, in order to Convince them; and e­ven you ought not to reject an H [...]ritick, till after the first ”& second Admonition. Implying that having FIRST dealt with them and given them First and Second ADMONI­TION, Declining to meet SUCH to Dispute, and also to Reject them, is Justifyable and Warrantable. Now G. K. whilst among us, having had such Gospell Order as afore­said & not onely first, but second & many Admonitions & much Condiscention, Long Suffering, brotherly kind­nss, and patience used towards him, under all his false accusations, slanders and abuses; both of particular per­sons and of Meetings; and also of Yearly-Meetings, both in America, and in England, in which, after all, he persist­ing, both by Word▪ Writing and Printing; he hath therefore been long since rejected, and thereby become unto us as an Heathen man [...] and a Publicain; and being Condemned out of his own [...] (in this bo [...]k before, as also in many other Prints of ours, plentifully proved,) he is (to us) no better than an Heritick [...], whatever those may thinck of him, that have newly Embraced him for a Min­ister among them; All which duely considered, together with our Reasons, in a Sheet Intituled, A Word to the well In­clined &c. As also because what we see occasion to doe in order to Wipe off the Reproach Cast upon the Truth and our [Page 51] Friends by him, the Way of the Press begun by himself, is surely best for Generall Information, and least Lyable to M [...]sunderstandings, Misrepresentations, and Exceptions; especially since our Principles, have so many years, and u­pon so many occasions as well of late, as formerly, been made known in Print to the World, and by which also, the Objections made against them, have and may be sufficiently answered. I can not se, how any Sober and truely Religious & Impartia [...]l person, of any Perswasion among profest Christians, can justly blame us, for declining any further dis­putes with him, or for our not so gratifying his restless and contentious Temper, and the rather, since the Apostle also Adviseth Timothy, to withdraw himself from such as were doting about Questions and Strifes of Words; whereof com­eth Envy, Strife, Railings, Evil Surmisings, Perverse Dispu­tings of men of Corrupt Minds; and Des;titute of the Truth; Supposing that Gain is Godlyness. But to follow after Righteousness, Godliness, Faith, Love, Patience, Meek­ness; And to Fight the good Fight of Faith. 1. Ti [...]. 6.4, 5.11, 12. Which Council we will take with the Lords Assistance.

[Page 52]

SOME few more Instances of the many, that might be brought of G. K's sayings, gain sayings, and False sayings &c.

AT first he could say, and plead hard Against-Forced maintainence; and Produced the Antient Protestant Testimony against it; and that to Force Wages for Preach­ing, was a Papish, but not a Protestant Principle; se Pre­tended Antidote pa. 68, 69, 70.

But of late he can Plead as hard for Tyths, and say, it is to be coped that the Parliment will never make an Act to have them put into the Publick Treasure. Se from pa. 378. to 384, of that he Falsly calls the Quakers Standard.

Again in defending Water-Baptism &c. He can now say, he knows no Society in Christendom, that hath laid them quiet aside, but the Quakers; Quakers Stand. pa. 430. yet in Serious Apeall pa. 34. he could say, that In­fants Baptism was not Practised until the third Age or Cen­tury [Page 53] after Christ; and was not brought in by the Command­ment of Christ; and that there are many of greater note for Learning and skill in, Antiquity, far more famous then Cotton Mather is ever like to be; that asert the same.

Note altho' G. K. hath retracted what he formerly held, about Baptism; yet these Learned Mens skill in Antiquity, is still in force against him, unless he could prove, that they have retracted also; And further; since Infants-Baptism is no Commandment of Christ, as any where to be found in Scripture, nor Practised till the third Age or Centu­ry after Christ; it's therefore evident, that it was brought in, and continued by the Doctrines and Commandments of men.

Again, he could once say, in pa. 88. of Way Cast up▪ when speaking against the term Persons in the Trinity; that Persons signifies Substances, and not the Modes and Properties of one Substance; but now he can say, they are Three Persons; consequently, from his own Mouth Three Substances▪ Query, is he better skilled in Philosophy, since he writt that book, or will he venture to say now, Three persons in the Trinity, are Three Substances; seeing again in pa. 30. of his Fourth Narative, he brings a Similitude, that they may neither be Three Substances, nor Three No­things; for saith he, there is a plain distinction of a medi­um in Created beings, betwixt Substance and Nothing. The three dementions of a body; Length, Bredth, and Depth, are neither three Nothings, nor three Substances. Query▪ And suppose, that were true; does it therefore follow, that three Persons are not three Substances? According to his former sentments? And yet again, observe a little low­er Ibid, he saith, that all Created beings are improper to [Page 54] express this Mistery; though I find nothing Produced by him to express it: But Properties, and Created beings, as Persons, Personall, dementions of Length, Bredth, and Depth of a body &c.

In the Fundamentall-Truths of Christianity, again he could say, that set Forms of Prayer &c. were not used in the Church till upward of 300 Years after Christ; which plainly shews them also, to be but Commandments and Tra­ditions of Man. Yet now he can say for them; and use very weak Arguments to prove them to boot; se Quakers Stand. pa. 389. 391.

Again, for G. F's being accused, for saying. He was Equall with God; and that the Soul was Part of God; he could once say, and Justifie G. F. from those very Calam­nies; yet now he is turned about, who but he, to accuse G. F. about those things; and that from those very Pas­sages, which he once vindicated him in; se more in this Book: Observe, is it likely he should see G. F.'s words, better now then when his Eyes were Younger?

Again, he could say, since he was Separated from Ʋs▪ that his Present Doctrine concerning the Faith of Christ, he had shewed and demonstrated, that it was well consistant with.—Robert Barclays Printed Books (particularly his Apo­logy; Truth and Innocency pa. 10.

Again, now he hath a mind to it, he can say, that the whole method proposed by the same Robert Barclay, in the same Apology, is a mean sham, of Deism or naturall Reli­i [...]; Note, since G. K's Doctrine eleven years ago, about [Page 55] this great Fundamentall of Faith in Christ, was well con­sistant with Robert Barclays Apology; (whose whole me­thod and Sistom here G. K. now saith is but meer Deism, and quite another Gospell, and Way of [...], than what our Saviour gave his Apostles to Preach. (se Quakers Standard pa. 282, 283.) and if G. K. is not Changed in Fun­mentalls; then is not he yet as unsound in this great Funda­mentall, as he would render R. B. to have been.

Again in his Presbiter. and Indep. pa. 7. when speaking of the Scripture, not being properly the Word of God; he could say, that (according to the Greek), the term [Word] mentioned in These 1.5. signifies Word of Talke or discourse: But in his Reasons for Renouncing Quakerism pa. 16. he can say that by that very term Word, in that very place now, is, meant Doctrine.

Again, in his Ʋniversall free Grace &c. from 1 cor. 2.1, 2. where the Apostle saith; he determined not to know any thing among them, save Jesus Christ and him Crucified. G. K. could once say, that according to the Greek, it is thus: not to know any thing [in you] save Jesus Christ, and him Crucified. And which he there says, is understood of the seed that suffered in them.

But now he can say in pa. 11 of his Retraction book, that that very text is to be understood, as he was Outward­ly Crucified; and but consequently of his Inward appear­ance: (Note) this is the Man, that is so much Valued by some, for his skill in the Languages. Query But what Dependancy is there upon these Languages, which possibly not one of 1000 understands, since they who do or pre­tend to under­stand [Page 56] them, can interpret them as they Please. The pre­mises considered, methinks G. K. should not take it amiss that the Title of this Book is PROTEUS, (who of old was said to be one, who could turn himself into what Shape he pleased) especially since in page 31. of his fourth Nara­tive, he uses that term Himself to G. W.

Again he could say in Quakers Stand. p. 507. ‘that Ro­bert“ Barclay and himself, held all the Principles of Christianity, that were Fundamentall; called The Sim­pliciter Credenda; and yet but a few lines Lower, he could say, that they both said and writt many things repugnant and Contradictory to the same; at least Indirectly and consi­quentially, [and in the next page,] he saith, that whatever their defaults were they acted not against their Perswas [...] ­ons” &c.’ Observe here then, that whereas G. K. said and writt many things Repugnant, and Contradictory to the Fundamentalls of Christianity; it was but according to his Perswasion (as he says), so that, then he had Per­swasions it seems that were repugnant to the Fundamentalls of Christianity, and yet at the same time held all the Funda­mentalls of Christianity.

Again in his Quakers Stand, pa. 476. ‘he can say, tho' “falsly and craftily, that Robert Barclays method of arguing against unlawfull Games, unprofitable Plays and Super­fluety and vanity of Apparell &c. was chiefly against the abuse and exess of those things; and therefore he would ”not contend with him about them; observe;’ this is cer­tainly a great and willfull abuse upon Robert Barclay. to render him, as if he was not against the use of Games, Plays, Sports Superfluety and vanity in Apparel &c. But [Page 57] only against the abuse of them, whereas, in divers pla­ces, Particularly, in pa. 515. he tells us in plain words, that it is not Lawfull, to use them. It's very like, G. K. had a reach here to save his Creditt, in thus giving the goe-by, to Robert Barclays weighty Arguments, against those things, least he should have offended the most Seri­ous, on the one hand, or those, who are not so on the other hand.

I would not willingly mistake G. K. but really, I can not inmagine, what else should occasion him, thus so ob­viously to stretch the Point, by abusing R. B. but be it as it will, we se he can say, and write very false and uncred­able things, when he has a mind to it. For thus he could once say, as in this book, and plead, that the Experss Knowledge and Faith of Christ's Sufferings &c. is not ab­solutely Necessary to Salvation, except where it was Re­vealed.

Again, he could say, that the Express Knowledge &c. is Absolutely and Indespensibly Necessary.

Again, he could say, that the Express Knowldege &c. is not Indispensibly Necessary, Except where Revealed, as above; Note, is not here Variation, in a Fundamentall Doctrine?

And now notwithstanding, all these sayings, and gain­sayings, mentioned in this book, with divers others that might be named, if what he says be true; he was allways found in Fundamentalls, nor chanded in his Principles, but is of the same Faith, that he hath been of, above this 30 Years; but as for the Quakers, with whom he walked 28 of that 30 Years; Alas! their Religion is no more Christ­ian, [Page 58] than the T [...]kes or Jesus is: They do not belive one Article, of the Apostles Creed, in true sence of Scripture; [...]ay, if it was not for their Habits, they would all be ta­ken for [...]; see his Reasons for Renouncing Qua­kerises pa. 14. 15. as if we were in all things else, be­lievers in that Grand Impostour. keeping the sixth day of the week, to Worship him, often visiting his Tomb &c. I say, as it in all this, and much more, we were like Ma [...]ns; for it we have nothing to distinguish us from Ma [...]o [...]t [...]s, but our Habitts, then must we be Guilty, of so believing, and so Practising, and to shew, that this did not Drop from him inadverantly appears, for that as above he said, the Quakers had no more Faith in Christ, than Turks and Jews, and that he would prove it before any Impartiall Auditory▪ also at Shrewr [...]bury; last Fall, he told us, that the Quakers Religion, and the Turks was all one, and that he could prove it, if we would give him an Opportunity: By this we may perceive, what little heed is to be taken, to what such an Envious and [...]avish man says, tho' he adds, he can Prove it; for Alas [...] since he will undertake to prove such Obvious Falshoods, to be true, what will he not venture at, when he hath a mind to it, tho' con­trary to our own Knowledge and Experience. And thinks we are oblidged to dance after him, by meeting him to hear his reiterated and often answered noise; or otherwise, when he hath a mind to find [...] his, Perum­tory Challenges: But that which puts a Check, to the car­reer, of his so many ab [...]s [...]s towards us, is, for that he meets with so few Bigots, from whom he can Extor [...]a be­lief [Page 59] (with all his miss Quoting Clipping and pe [...]verting ou [...] Friends Words, sence and meanings) that we are as he would render us to be. Indeed, he may pudder him self as long as he will: Read Quotations out of our Friends books, Strain their sence, pervert their meaning, as long as he may be permitted or take hold of any omission o [...] [...] of here and there a word, either by Pen or press; of that are not so Cautiously worded, in every respect as need were, tho' if by comparing their words, one with another, their sence and meaning appears sound; G.K. when he had more Charity, and less prejudiced, then he ha [...]t now, could say, all but Prejuduced Persons will say, Charity is to be allowed, and the best construction ought to be given to their Words &c. Serious Appeal pa. 7. but for want of that Charity he now puts the worst sence that he can with any Colour devise; thus he may write, and write again; and if he write 1000 more books than he hath yet done; I hope he shall never make it appear, that ever the Quakers were or are unsound, in the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, either outwardly or inwardly; of that they do not Faithfully & sincerely believe every Artic­le of that called the Apostles Creed, in the true sence of Scrip­ture; or that our workship, is not that which Christ, decla­red to be the true; when he said the hour cometh, and now is, when the true Worshippers shall Worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth; for the Father s [...]cketh such to Worship him: John 4.23. Or that it is not according to the Apostle, where he faith; We are the Circumcision, who Worship God in Spirit, and Rejoice in Christ Jesus; and have no Confidence in the flesh &c. Phil­lip [Page 60] 3.3. And since we find not that our Saviour or his A­postles, either Commanded or Practised those divers need­less Practices, ways and manners of Worship, so much used in saverall Churches in Christendom, since the Apostles days; and are therefore but needless inventions of men, and set up in the night of Apostacy, and tho 'as we are Sa­tisfied, that that degree of Reformation, both in Doctrine and Practice, in the Antient Reformers, and their denying and laying aside as the Inventions of men, so many of those needless Practies, Cerimonies and Customs in the Church of Room, (there being no Precept nor Example in Scripture for, them) was the work of God in that day, even so we are, satisfied, that the more effectuall Reformation and laying a­isde the rest of those needless Practises or Cerimonies and Customs (for which we find no more Command or Example, then those other) is the work of God, and of his Requi­ring in our days.

[Page]

POSTSCRIPT.

Being some Remarks on Daniel Leeds's abusive Al­manack for the Year 1703.

DANIEL LEEDS in his Almanack, seems to value him­self, for that the Quakers think it worth their while to print books against him; for (saith he) ‘as Rediculous “and Inconsiderable a Runagado &c. As the Foxonion Quakers terme; yet they think worth their cost to print ”books against [...] me &c.’ Answer Let not that make him Proud, for was not Alexander the Copper-Smith writ against for doing much Evill in his days se 2 Tim. 4.14. but he says, they are Invictiv'd Lying Pamphlets. Ans. But he should have told us wherein; for I assure him, that without Informa­tion, I cannot find them; tho it's true in his Printed Chal­lenge he mentions, between 30 and 40 Lyes, Perv [...]rsions and Forgeries in my book: But was c [...]nning enough not to name one, except that wherein he so notoriously abuses W. P. by falsly accusing him, as calling Christ as man, the Finite Impotent Creature; for which I detected him in Satans Harbinger; and in D. L. Justly Rebuked &c. To the last of which (saith he) ‘I have returned a Reply to “the main point of what therein relates to me; a little to open the Juglers Box, and shew his Sophest [...]y, in taking ”W.P. off from terming Christ as Man Finite and Impotent. Ans. Is his Stomach a little come down, indeed I say a little, because it's not so much as it ought, yet so much as that he is fain to make use of the Juglers box himself, (to save his Credit but all in vain) by altering the terms of his [Page 2] accusation; for where did I ever take, or go about to take W. P. off from terming Christ as Man Finite and Impotent only; it really seems to me, as if in his Reply, that he speaks of (which I suppose is not yet published) he is not only shifting from the terms of his accusation, but from the page also, from whence he took it; for the accusation was, that W. P. had in his book called the Sandy Foun­dation Shaken, called Christ as Man, the Finite Impotent Creature: The place was page 20; but now I am apt to think, he sees, that neither the place nor matter will hold water; and so is fain to slip over to page 21, where possibly he may fancy, he can make a noise with some­thing there, a little to amuse the Reader; for in the said 21 page, when W. P. was arguing the point, then in­difference by other sort of arguments, than he did in page 20, there he asserts that Christ as Man was Finite, and therefore could not as such satisfie Infinite Justice, which thing the Priests also acknowledged, as I shewed in D. L. Rebuked pa. 25. therefore how did I go about, to take W. P. off from terming Christ as Man, Finite and Impo­tent, when the term Finite I Expressly said W. P. owned; and as for the word Impotent, I said nothing about it; he is not like to shift his accusation so, and to Creep out by that; but possibly he may think, he hath matter a­gainst W. P. for holding (as did also the Priests) that Christ as Man, being Finite, could not Satisfie Infinite Just­ice; and that that implyed Impotency in Christ as man; and so perhaps make some noise of that, unless the conside­ration Of Christ's own words John 5.30. ( [...]) I can of my own self do nothing, should make him [...] little [...] ­pon [Page 3] it however: Let D. L's thoughts be what it will in that matter; yet as his accusation was not▪ for that W. P. had in pa. 21. Expressly or Implicitly term'd Christ as man Finite and Impotent; so there was no such matter, there­fore laid down for me to vindicate him about; but that W. P. did as D. L. says in p. 20. use such [...]ghting In [...]e­verent,(or to use D. L's own words), Blasphemous Ex­pression as to call the man Christ, the Finite Impotent Crea­ture; as I utterly deny it, so I have in D. L. Justly Re­buked it, and plainly shewed the contrary: And D.L. may write again and again, frett and flu [...]er in his own nett as long as he will; but untill he can get the art of proving a thing to be, which is not, he will never be a­ble to prove that against W. P.

I shall conclude this head, after having told the Read­er, that about two Months ago, I happened to see a book of G. W's called Truth and Innocency &c. Printed in the Year 1699. which I never saw, nor heard of be­fore. One part of which, was an answer to a [...]ibel, the Author of which, had accused W. P. of this very thing; where it's like D. L. might pick it up; and which in page 70 W. P. Answers for himself thus (viz.) ‘Which is so “grose a strain of Envy and Abuse, that no ingenious per­son can read it without an abhor [...]ency of the Authors. Temper and work, and shews how little Credit ought to be given him in the rest of his wo [...]k [...]s; for it's plain, W. P. made the absurdity lye here, that the Doctrine he opposed, makes it imposible for God to forgive with­out a ridged Satisfaction, end yet man, who is a Finite Impotent Creature, is not only capable of it, but Com­manded [Page 4] ”to do it, se S [...]ndy Foundation pa. 4. Seit 7. thus far W. P. which was published in England, a little be­fore Satans Harbinger was published here:’ well I next take notice, as to his Quotations, what D. L. saith and boasts in the said Preface, concerning the Truth of them, thus▪ ‘“As to the following Quotations, there is few if any, but what have been examined in England, by Eight Minist­ers, who have attested to the Truth of them, so that ”t'will be in vain for the Quakers to say I belye them &c.’ And he might have put in G. K. for the ninth Minister▪ for in his Serious Call, there G. K. saith of his Quota­tions, that they Exactly agree with the Books, out of which they were taken, as Cited in the Margin, and that he will prove it to our faces; O! for notwithstanding they have attested them; yet I shall make it appear, that they have all, with D. L. to boot, Attested to very false things: I begin with his Almanack; Eleventh Month-Page, where he Cites, as also doth G. K. in his said Serious Call, G. F. in great Mis. pa. 28. the Light which every man hath, that cometh into the World, is Sufficient to Salva­tion, without the help of any other means or discovery.

Ans. I must now make bold, and break in upon these attestors, atest and not in vain neither, for I do affirm, there is no such thing to be found in that page, nor in any part of that book, as I know of; therefore it's not in vain to say, D. L. G. K. and the Eight Ministers, have belyed G. F. here, tho' had those words been there, methinks it should not be to them Offencive, seing G. K. saith the Light-within, is God and Christ Hericy and Ha­tred pa. 14. and also pa. 65. of his Catichism, in the [Page 5] Year 98. And also seing the Debat [...] is not about what God and Christ doth do, but what God and Christ is sufficient to do; for as G. K. said when Beniemen Keith said, the Lighter, could not give, among other things there mentio­ned, Eternall Peace and Salvation; G. K. tells him, it is a reall Degree of Blaspheming &c. And his Reasons are; because (saith he) God and Christ can do all things, and doth God and Christ is in all men; not only, as that ge­nerall presence in all his Creatures: but in a Speciall way of Revolution, as being the Offspring of God; se Re [...]uta­tion pa. 39. but (saith he) it's one thing, what God and Christ can do, and f [...]r another thing, what they com­monly and Ʋniversally do: Ibid, Even so say we, it's one thing what the Light can do, and another thing what it doth do; now that God doth not by the inshining of his own Light in our Hearts, without Respect had to Christ's Death and Sufferings &c. without us, save any of Man­kind, we did still Grant, se Modest Appeal pa. 17. Well D. L's next quotations [...] this; W. P. in Quakerism, a new Nick-name pa. [...]. says, Faith in Christ's Outward M [...]i [...]station is a Deadly Poison, these latter ages have been infected with, to the Destruction of Godly Living. Also in Serious Call, G. K. H [...]re hath it. I again Cha [...]ge all these 9 Ministers and 5 of them in the fourth Narra­tive, together with D. L. to be all false attestors, for this Quotation agrees not with the book; for W. P. call'd [...] Faith in Christ's Outward Manifestation, a Deadly Poi­son &c. But says, the making Holy Life Legall, and Faith in the History; Mark [the History] of Christs outward Ma­nifestation, Christianity is a Deadly Poison, these late A­ges [Page 6] have been infected with, to the Destruction of Godly Living &c. Now (Mark the word Christianity, is wrong placed, and should be next after the word Manifestation, and is so Corrected in the Er [...]ate; and the words [the His­tory] they have all of them, very unfairly left out, as if there were no difference between our Christian Faith, stand­ing in one Hist [...]y o [...] Christ, and it's standing in Christ him­self, howsoever manifested; so that they have curtailed his words, and perverted his meaning, for the true sence of W. P's words there, is thus (viz.) to make Holy Life Legall, and to make Faith in the [History] of Christ's Outward Manifestation, to be Christianity; is a Deadly Poison &c. And surely, it's one thing to ground our Christian Faith upon the [History] of Christ's Outward or Inward Manifestation, and another thing, to ground it upon Christ himself, as Christ said to the Jews; ye search the Scriptures, for in them ye think to have Eternall Life &c. and ye will not come to Me, that ye may have Life: Now did not Christ himself here disclaim the Jews, from placing their Faith in the History, so as to make that to be saving; or which is to say, to give Eternall Life; for they were to come to him, that they might have Life; yet not so as to Reject: But to search the Scriptures &c. Even so say we.

Well next, as to what W. P. hath said, about Christ's outward Person that Suffered &c. It's spoken to, in the foregoing book; but as to the fearfull noise D. L. makes, as if those Words of W. P's were Incouragement to Athe­ists, Turks, or Jews, to Dispise and Ridicule the Christian Religion.

[Page 7] Ans. How can that be, since W. P. in almost the next foregoing words, to those cited by D. L. in plain words declares our belief, that he that laid down his Life, and Suffered his Body to be Crucified without the Gates of Jeru­salem; is Christ, the onely Son of the Most-High God: thus W. P. which neither of th [...]se Pervertors, nor false Citers have taken notice of, as I can se; and as to the in­couragement that Turks and Jews &c. may have, or take at our Writings, let that ly at their Door, who thus pervect them, and miscite them; and suppose, any should make so bold, to Clip the above words of Christ, and set them down thus; ye search the Scripture, for in them ye have not, ye think to have Eternall Life; now would not that give incouragement to Jews or Atheists to Redicule the Holy Christian Religion, by thinking they expected Eter­nall Life from the Scripture; but not from Christ himself; yet after this manner, do these sort of men, often deal with the Quakers Writings, and [...]hen Confidently affirm, they exactly agree with their Books.

As for his twelfth Month page, it runs chiefly upon Begging the Question, taking false Quotations for true ones, and so taking that Granted which we upon Truths Botom deny; yet I cannot, but take notice to the Reader, how like one of the Prophane Persons of the times, he scofs at our Friends Exercise, in their Preaching; as also in their solemn Prayers to Allmighty God.

As for his first Month page, concerning the Scripture; G. F's Words are in Answer, to a Priests Expressions. (viz.) Outward Writings, Paper and Ink, and that that is not Infallible, nor is it not Divine; but Humane, and [Page 8] if this be un [...]ound, th [...] the contrary, to writt that out­ward Writings, Paper and Ink, [...] In [...]llibl [...] [...] Di­vine, but which of the [...] is most [...], let men of [...] Judgment Judge? And I [...] well Satisfied, that as to George Fox, the Holy Scriptures were Precious unto him, [...] in pa. 23. of his Journall [...]e conf [...]s, and that he had no sleight esteem of them and that [...]he Holy men of God writt them; as for what he [...] of [...] out of the North pa. 14. tho' I have never seen that Book, yet I have seen such Quotations from it, as clearly shews, that G. F. was no [...]lighter of the Scriptures. The Citation is [...]n Truth and Innocency, by G. W. page 19. thus; ‘Tho' this News out “of the North, is quoted against us, yet it is very parti­ally and unfairly done, for in the same Book, the Holy Scripture is Chearly owned, as spoken by the Lord, and his Holy Prophets, Christ, and his Apostles pa. 5. 8. the Law of God, and the Prophets expressly so owned pa. 23. 28. tho' they that put the Letter for the Light, Preaching their own Words, and Imaginations, thereu­pon are disowned pa. 12. consequently, the Holy Scrip­tures are owned, but the Pervertors and Perversions [...] ”owned.’ And to conclude this Head; let th [...]m publi [...]h their reiterated Citations, that have been so often answer­ed, or others as much as they will, yet I am perswaded, they shall never be able to find any thing therein to prove that we do not own the Scripture, to be given [...]orth, by the movings of the Spirit of God, nor that the Doctrine or matter therein contained, is not Infallible, or Divine or that it is Dust or Serpents m [...]at; for as we firmly believe, they were given by Divine Inspiration; so they are to us, [Page 9] exceeding Precious; the most instructing, and the most Edifying-Book of all books in the World; therefore, whatever Books our Children miss of Learning, we eve [...] take care, that they miss not to Learn the Holy Scriptures.

As so his Second Month page, first, about the Scripture be­ing the Word of God. We own them to be the Words of God, as it is written, as in Exod. 20.1. and Gid spake all these Words, and Revelation the first and third: Blessed is he that Readeth, and they that hear the Words of this Prophecy. And whereas he says G. F. says of his own writings; To you, This is the Word of the Lord. Ans. but what was that [THIS] it was not the Ink and Paper, no more, than it was so in the Prophets time, when they said, the Word of the Lord came unto me saying &c. Now the Word of the Lord came unto them, before they writt, and from that Word, were the words written, and the word of God was in the beginning, according to John 1. v. 1. but that Scriptures was not so, and indeed I could never see this their C [...]vell, to be any more then a strife about words, in as much, as both they and we own them to be writt by Di­vine Inspiration, as above; and we believe all the Doctrines therein contained, and all the Precepts therein given, to mankind in generall, ought by all men, who have the knowledge of them, to be believed, and Prac­tised, and that whatsoever is contrary the [...]to, ought by all to be retected. As to his Citing Edward Buroughs about Scripture Commands and of W. P's Vindicating him; I have always understood it, to intend only particular Commands, such as to Baptize, Preach the Gospell, or as when the Disciples were sent forth to Preach; they were [Page 10] Commanded to provide neither Gold nor Silver, nor Brass in their Purses Matt. 10.9. and as where Christ bid the Young-Man go his way, and sell whatsoever he had, and give to the Poor, and he should have Treasure in Heaven Mark 10.21. Now I suppose, neither D. L. nor G. K. does understand this last Command to be binding upon them, any more than the Quakers do, nor do they believe (I suppose) that where Christ Commanded his Disciples to wash each others feet, from the Example of his Washing their feet, as he then saith, I have given you an Example, that ye should do, as I have done to you, se John 13.14.15. And altho' this was so then Required of his Disciples, and Practised afterwards in the Church; even in Tertullions time, as will be seen by and by; yet I suppose, few Christ­ians of any sort, if any at all, looks upon this binding u­pon them, and that it was such particular Commands that Edward Burough meant, and in which W. P. vindicated him, is clear from his own next words which D. L. hath left out, (viz.) I Challenge, (saith he) to find an Example for it, they were oblidged every one by their own com­mands, and then explains his meaning thus; one was sent to Baptize, and Preach the Gospell; another was sent not to Baptize: But to Preach the Gospell &c. Therefore why should W. P's words [No Commands] be taken in such a strict sence, since according to the Maxim, words ought to be taken, according to the Subject, men are [...]reating a­bout; and indeed, the Particle [No] cannot allways be taken in a strict sence in Scripture, without one place Con­tradicting another; for in the one place, the Scripture saith of Christ, that he hath [no Form] nor Comliness Isaia [Page 11] 53.2. but in another place, it speaks of being in the [Form] of God, and that he took on him the [Form] of a Servant Phill. 2.6, 7. and as to the word Comliness, in Cant: 2: 14: it's said of Christ, that sweet is his Voice, and his Countenance is Comly; yet heres no Contradiction, unless we take the particle [No] strictly; but neither in this, nor in W. P's case is [...]here any need to take it [...]o:

As for his third Month page, what he says therein of William Shewin▪ I having not his book, and W. S. being deceased, I shall take G K's own Rule in Serious Appeal pa: 7: and give G: W's Explanation on W: S's words, for there G: K. allows, that where the sence and mean­ing is sound, though not alltogether so safely, or Cau­tiously worded in every respect, Charity is to be allowed, and that they themselves, or Friends for them, in respect of their absence or Decease, who did best know thm, ought to be allowed to give their sence of them: Now I have Reason to think, scarce any Friend living, knew W: S: better than G: W: did, who in his Truth and In­nocent pa: 55: Explains W: S: thus: ‘I know his intent “was not to Jesus only, as the son of Abraham and David, and Mary; but as he is God over all, Blessed forever: ”All Worship, Honour and Glory belongs to him:’

As for what he saith about W: P's saying, Christ in us, Offereth up himself; this I have Answered already in Sa­tans Harbinger pa: 23, 24: As also, that about Christ pay­ing the Dept to God for us; not any of which doth, D: L: take any notice of: I also told him in pa: 25: How and where W: P: Expressly owned Christ in Life, Doc­trine, and Death, fulfilled his Fathers will, and Offered [Page 12] up, a most Satisfactory Sacrifice; but not to pay God, as being otherwise unable to save men, as his opposers then held, and which was the cause of that debate, as in pa: 23 I told; and now I also tell him [...]hat G. K. in his Serious Appeal no [...] retracted, hath said in pa. 27.—(viz.) ‘It must “be granted (saith he) that the Life of Christ in the Saints, is a sweet Incense, before God, and is a Sacrifice in another ”sence.’ Meaning in another sence than that of his Sacrifice, without us, upon the Tree of the Cross; he having be [...]n speaking of that Just before. Was G. K. so wise then, and both D. L. think W. P. was so weak, as to understand it of that Sacrifice without us, on the Tree of the Cross, where our Lord became Obedient unto Death; even the Death of the Cross, as in Phill. 2.8. But W. P. mentio­ned there nothing of a Sacrifice unto Death nor of the Death of the Cross, but of a Living Sacrifice; and we do not in the least understand, that by Christ's apeasing the Wrath of God, now in an interceeding and mediatory way, should be in opposition to, but only and alone, for the sake of that great offering of Christ, on the Tree of the Cross without us.

Well in the same page D. L. tells us, and so doth G. K. in his Serious Call, that G. F. said to Christopher Wade, "the Devill was in thee, thou sayest, thou art Saved by Christ without thee; and so hast Recorded thy self a Re­probate, [...]reat Mistery pa: 40.

Ans. As [...] place is miss quoted, so the passage is miss rendred; for it should have been, if any where, in page 250. And here again, I charge them, both with a ta [...]se Citation; for they have both of them so Clipt [...]. F's words [Page 13] as much as to alter the sence of them, tho' but by leaving out the word [And] For G. F's words are thus, first he tells, C. W. (viz.) Thou hast shewed in thy book stuffed with Lyes, how thou hast been Tormented, and of the filthy air, come out of thee, and the D [...]vill was in thee. Note, here is the end of that part of G. F's Sentence, which clearly shews, that G. F. spake those words, and said, the Devill was in thee, because of the Lyes he had stuft his book with; which Reasons they had left out. And then G. F. begins in the other part of his Sentence with an [A [...]d.] ‘And thou sayst thou art saved by Christ without “thee, and so hast Recorded thy self a Reprobate, and art Ignorant of the Mistery of Christ within; for without ” that, thou doest not know Salvation: G. F. having shew­ed in the same page, that Cristopher Wade was so far from believing in Christ within, that he said; it was dangerous to Preach Christ within man; now here lyes the falsity, and the abuse, in great part, of these men, that they left out the word, [And] after the words, [the Devill was in thee;] and so made it look, as if these words, [the Devill was in thee] were because he had said, [he was Saved by Christ without him;] whereas th [...]se words [the Devill was in thee,] were because of his Lyes he stuffed his Book with; and which he called▪ the filthy Air that came out of him, and these words; [so thou hast Recorded thy-self a Repro­bate▪] were because he has said, [he was Saved by Christ without him▪] he having as above, denyed Christ within; and we know according Scripture, if Christ be not in us, we are Reprobates. Now is it not in vain, in this vain man D. L. to say, [...]t's in vain for us to say, he hath be­lyed [Page 14] us, because Eight Ministers have attested these things.

Well in his fourth Mon [...]h's page, he is an vain, in en­deavouring to Render our Friends in Confusion, about the Light; and Pray where is the confusion? why W. P. says▪ there are not two Lights in Man, that Regard Re­ligion, no [...] that Repro [...]es or Condemns for [...]in. And Edward [...] &c. Says of s [...]me, that their [...]ght is only Nat [...] ­ [...] [...] Carnall, and doth only make manifest Carnall Transgre [...]ions, and who Judge by the naturall Light &c. Now note, (saith D. L.) here are two Lights within most plainly, which W. P. doth so posative [...]y oppose.

Ans. Surely D. L's. Da [...]kness & Envy hath occasioned him to loose his honesty or common sence; for his own quotation shews that W. P. only denyed two Lights in man, that Regarded Religion▪ and Condemns for Sin which neither E. B. nor Richard Hubberthorn. (who he also quoted), did oppose in the least; therefore no Confusion in them: And as for the Carnall Light that E. B. spoke, of that made manifest Carnall Transgressions; they did not say, it Regarded Religion, nor Condemned for Sin; and there was a Law, which he called a Carnall Law, by which it seems he was then Impris [...]ated, and by their Car­nall or naturall Light, they could se as Carnall and natu­rall men, when men transgressed their Law; even as the Servants of King Ahasuer [...]s could easily enough tell by their naturall Light, that Mordecai had transgressed the Carnall Law of the King, in not bowing to Proud H [...]man, accor­ding to the Kings Commandment; for said they, why Transgressed they the Kings Commandment; and E. B. being Imprisoned at that time, only for writing to a man, [Page 15] of his being Guilty of Pride, Drunkenness and Whoredo [...]; therefore tho' he was willing to Answer for himself [...] Authority; yet he refused to [...] that cause into the [...] of Lawyers, who Judged by the naturall Light, as he there says▪ but [...] [...]s all this to W. P's saying? there is not two Lights in men, that Condemns for Sin; because that which Condemns for Sin, is a Super-naturall and a Spirituall Light.

As to his fifth Month page, he speaks of Edward Bur­roughs Epistle to G. F's great Mistery, where he saith; this Infallible Spirit was given to every one of us, in par­ticular &c. Now pray, what hurt is in all this; for it is no more then to say, that they had the Spirit of Christ, and if D. L. have it not, he is none of his: For Paul saith, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His Rom. 8.11. And surely, the Spirit of Christ is in­fallible. As for that old third-bare Story of G. W's say­ing, I may see cause otherwise to word the matter; and yet our intentions be the same; I did in Satans Har [...]inger pa. 26. 27. largly Answer: Which Answer he takes no no­tice of; but Repeals it, as if what he writes, were all as unanswerable and Infallible, as he would make us believe, the attest of his Eight Ministers is; tho' I shall shew him, how he is Guilty in this very Almanack, of the same thing; for in his eleventh Month's page, he saith, W. P. calls Faith in Christ's outward Manifestation, a Deadly Poison &c. And but in the next page, he repeating the very same thing, by the reference he there makes to it; his Charge is, that Faith in the Outward Christ, [as if there were two Christ's] not the [Page 16] Faith in Christ's outward Manifestation; but Faith in the Outward Christ is a Deadly Poison &c. Here though he means the same thing, yet he hath otherwise worded the matter, and abused the sence to boo [...] Well he says, I would in D. L. Rebuked pa. 1. [...]ave made People think the Quakers own themselves Sinners; but how is he so wise, as to know that; I am very sure, I said no such thing there as [own] themselves, being in the present tence, it's true, I said that the Lord had let them se their We [...]kness, and Failings; and that without the assistance of Gods Holy Spirit, they can no ways be preserved from Falling, un­der and into temptation: But how far any had been pre­served from fallings under the Devils Temptations, or not preserved, I medled not with; but had I expressed my self according to D. L's strain; must we therefore conclude it False Doctrine, to say▪ God had given them the Infallible Spirit? For is not a manifestation of the Spirit given to every man to Profit withall? Cor. 12.7. Yea he gave his good Spirit to the Rebellious Jews; but they Rebelled against it, as in Nehemia 9.20. And is not Gods good Spirit Infallible? Again, [...]t's said when he As­cended upon high, he led Captivity Captive, and gave g [...]ts unto men, to the Rebellious also, that the Lord might dwell among them, se Psalms the 68.18. Compar­ed with Ephes 4.8. But what a great degree of Darkness is this man gone into!

In his sixth Month's page, he greatly abused W. P. in saying, he Laughs at the Church of England, for con­fessing themselves Sinners.

Ans. That W. P. Laughs at the Church of England, by [Page 17] these words, Alas Poor Souls! is more than he can prove; was not the Prophets Commanded to C [...]ye A [...]as! for all the Evill Abominations of the House of Israel Eze [...] And though I never se the Passage. I cannot think he meant what he there said, of all the Members of that Church; yet it's too manifest, how that Church then Induldgeo her Mem­bers in great Vanity; as in Excess;ive Pride and Vanity in Apparell, which greatly displeases the Lord, as may be seen by the Prophet Isaia, in the third Chapter: And is also against the advice of the Apostle, which was, that Women should adorn themselves in Modest Aparel, [...] 1. Tim. 2.9. And now as to other great Vanitys so much then Induldged, as Plays, Sports, Cards, Dice, Danc­ing, Comodies, Revellings, often A companied with Quarrelling, Prophane Swearing Drinking &c. Of which I shall not say so much as G. K. himself hath said of them, in his Rector Corrected pa. 5. where he speaks concerning the Church of England thus; ‘That no People in all Eng­land “ are known to be worser Livers of those called Prote­stants, than some of those that hear the Common Prayers, ”and are Members of that Church; and in pa. 99. he speak­ing of their Ministers, saith, ‘Do they not make the “People vain? do not they teach the People, that many things that they use in Eating and Drinking, and putting on Apparell, Games, Plays and Commodies, wherein there is much Vanity, are Lawfull and no Sin in them, ”and which the Lord hath Raised us up to test [...]fie against &c.’ So that it seems, when he was of the Lords Raising, he could then Testifie against them, as also against their many vain Idle words, Cerimonies and Complements; as [Page 18] [...]e also saith; ‘Is it not now a sign that he is fallen down, “ ”from whence he is once raised?’ But to the matter, these things above being Practised year after year, without a­ny Church censure, on those that use them; and then a­gain a year after go to Church, and Crye, Lord have Mer­cy on us &c. I am perswaded was the Occasion of these words then spoken by W. P. not for their acknowledg­ing; but the acknowledgment and still persisting, and so much pleading for these things, that his concern was to speak against. But tho' this false D. L. pretends in his Pre­face, that he had concerns of greater Moment, then to Answer my book, (viz. to detect our pernitious Principles as he falsly calls them;) does he think this will ever do with him, for false quoting and perverting our Friends words, or does he think, that he and his eight Ministers bare say so, is enough, tho' ma­nifestly contrary to Truth? as I particularly proved upon him in Satans Harbinger pa. 104. 105. As also upon them, and G. K. too, in some of the quotations now, in con­sideration; I say for all his pretences, of a concern of moment against us, contemning our Principles, and his endeavouring to render us in Confusion about them; yet I never saw so much as one word, that he hath writt this ten years, with the least concern either against, the above vain Practises, or G. K's great confusi­ons in his books, about Doctrine, and Funda­mentall Principles of Religion, tho' he saith, he is of the same Faith, as he hath been above this thirty years, And always sound in Fundamentalls; therefore whether that which Prompts this D. L. on to this work, be not [Page 19] his great partiality and Enmity against the Quakers, to­gether with his thinking thereby to Justifie himself, for deserting their Meetings; let all who are truely desireous to commune with those, whose Doctrine, Discipline and Conversation is most agreeable to the Simplicity and Truth of the Gospell of our Lord Jesus Christ, consider of; and then Judge by the line of Truth: And tho' D. L. [...] his Al [...]ack Chronology, used to make great noise against the Quakers, as if they had Persecuted for Religion, tho' to ca [...] that so, which was but for the Authoriteys dealing with some, who at that time insinuated fa [...]se things a­gainst, and falsly accused some then in Government: For my part, I often lookt upon it, G. K. did then just trifle with the word Persecutions; but yet I say, now G. K. is co [...] out, and stirrs up the Government at home, what in him lyes, to reall Persecutions indeed, (which partly he may be Suffered to do, as a Judgment upon him, for his so trifling with the word Persecution here): But now I'le Warrant you, as to G. k's turning Persecutor indeed, as far as he hath Power, D. L. is as Mute as a Fish; not one word of that have we from him; and altho', in his twelfth Month's page, he makes a noise of the Care, he pretends he hath for his own, and other's Children, that they may not fall into the Snares of the Devill, for want of Care &c. As if he suspected, his Children would not take after their Father, to Read our books, with such a wrong prejudiced and perverting mind, as he hath done; how­ever they may learn Pride and Vanity, vain Sports, and shews, Gaiming, and Revelling, confused Nations in Reli­gion; yea and may learn of G. K. to be a reall Persecutor [Page 20] for Religion too; for any Cautions that ever I have seen him give against it, and as for his there Cautioning against throwing off the old Religion, may not this put them u­pon turning Papists? the oldness of whose Religion they render as a great prop to seppost it, but the true Religion is oldest of all.

As for G. F's saying in great Mistery pa. 101. that it's the Doctrine of Devills, to Preach, that men shall have Sin' and be in a Warfare as long as they be on Earth.

Ans. The contrary of which must surely be, that men must Sin as long as they live; but then let that be compar­ed with the saying of our Saviour: If you Dye in your Sins; whether I go you cannot come; and altho' in one sence, the best of Saints may be said to be in a Warfare: Yet it does not follow that they must allways Sin; which is always to be overcome in that Warfare; for it's said, whatsoever is born of God, overcomes the World, and whatsoever is born of God, Sins not; se 1 John 54.18. And as to what he hath pickt out of E. B's book; (viz.) "God doth not accept of any, where there is any failing &c.

Ans. According to Scripture, Acceptance is in the well doing, as in Gen. 4.7. If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and it thou doest not well, Sin lyes at thy door; and the Apostle faith: He that sears God, and works Righteousness, is accepted of him Acts 10.35. And tho' the greatest of Evills is forgiven us for Christ's sake, upon true Repentance, which is Confessing and Forsak­ing; yet without that, we find no Promise of the for­giveness of any Sin at all.

In his Seventh and Eighth Month's Pages, he speaks, as [Page 21] if G. F. had falsly quoted and perverted the Priests words, in his Answers to them; to which not having the Priest's books to Examine the matter by; I shall say no more to it at present, than first to let the Reader know, that if I had no other Reason than these following, for not trusting him in his quotations without Examination, it would sure­ly excuse me; for after he having said, that Tho. Crisp shews in a book called an Esay, that G. F. had in answer­ing Priest's and Professors books, falsly quoted and per­verted them &c. And that when he first saw the said Tho. Crisps book, he could not believe G. F. would be so wick­ed &c. And then D. L. adds, ‘But I have since seen “the Quakers Answer to this very book of Tho. Crisps, sub­scribed Ed. Pennington, and I Read it diligently, and in all the Answer I do not find he denys any one passage that Tho. Crisps quotes, which if they had not been true­ly quoted, I am sure he would have done, by which I ”know G. F. was Guilty as T. C. charged him &c.’

Ans. I must say, it was very subtily done in D. L. to conceal the Title of Ed. Penningtons book, that we might be at a loss, how to detect, and lay open to the World, his baseness in abusing both Ed. Pennington and his Reader; for observe, E. P's said Answer to T. C. is contained in about one Sheet of Paper, and he having Read it dili­gently, could not but know the reason, why E. P. could neither own it, no [...] deny it, (to wit) because he knew not where to meet with the Priest's books, as he there ex­pressly tells us; se the Introduction to his book, called Ra [...]shkah &c. And to trust T. C. without examining the thing, I se he could not; for in the next page, he tells [Page 22] him, that in point of quotations, he would never trust him more, now is not this D. L: a base, false, deceit­full Scribler, to pretend to say, he was sure Edward Pen­nington would have denyed it, had it not been true, when he knew it was for want of the books, that he could not tell, whether it was true or false; and therefore I come upon D: L: again, where he saith, (viz) ‘When I wrote “my News of a Trumpet, I was of a belief, that the Quakers began well, having not seen the contrary, as I since have, ”as above &c.’

Ans. Did he then believe that the Quakers begun well, how was it then, that at that very time, and in that very book, he so much accused the first Instruments of that beginning, as G:F: E:B: &c. in their antient books of False Doctrine, Blasphemy, or at least, a meer hoap of Con­fusion; all which sufficiently manifest's his own Confusion, as for his great Lye about our Friends, as not daring to read opposers books as he talks of: I say had that been true, as it is false, I had neither had the appertunity nor trouble, to have detected him, for his so many foul abuses towards us.

I come now to his ninth Month's page, where he hath patcht up as great a parcell of Lyes against W: P: as I think a man could almost invent, he speaking again of G: F: per­verting (as he says) the Priest's words, and which he calls Forgeries; and then runs on, as if he cared not what he said, or as if he counted it Lawfull for himself to be Guilty of the same thing, and so asks a question, and then Answers thus; ‘But have they no Cloke to cover these For­geries “ of G:F's? Yes the Fluent Tongued Penn, has in­vented such a Cover, as no Equivacating Jesuite could [Page 23] out do it, 'tis [...] Penns Preface, to Foxes Journall, in Recommending of him; he says: It proceeds from one side of his understanding, which was toward the World, and which he there acknowledges, was somwhat Dark ”or Weak;’ thus D: L: now this I say first, what differ­ence there may be, betwixt the Priest's words, and G: F's Quotation? I know not; but I am assured, D: L: hath both false cited and quoted G: F's Great Mis: in this very matter; but Secondly, if G: F: did at any time miss the matter, in repeating the Priest's Expressions, how know [...] D: L: but that the Priest's complained (as it was likely they would) to G: F: of it, and that upon which the mistake may have been owned and Rectified above fourty years ago; but admitted, it were all true, as D: L: here says, and never yet Rectified, that can be no cover for D: L's present, as well as former manifest Forgeries and perversions against our Friends, of which this following is another palpable instance; and unto which his Eig [...] M [...]nisters are by him Intituled, unless he would distinguish any one quotation from the rest, unto which they had not attes [...]ed Se his Preface, and I proceed to the Forgery it self; for what can be a greater piece of Forgery, than first to render it so, as i [...] W: P: had taken for granted, that G: F: was Forger, and then to excuse him, said it proceed, (Mark [i [...]] proceed that is to say, the Forgery) from one side of his understanding &c. And lastly, that W: P: there acknowledged it was somwhat Dark or weak, all which I do affirm, is most notoriously False; for first, there is not one word of G: F'r being a Forger, or any other offen­der; so much as hinted at in the least: Secondly, neither [Page 24] is there any such relative expression, nor any thing like i [...], as [it proceeds] as D. L. hath most abusively render­ed it, neither is there any such, or such like expression, as he says W. P. acknowledges, (to witt) fom [...]ha [...] Dark or Weak. Upon the whole, the Proverb is here made good upon this D. L. (v [...]z.) ‘The F [...]rge Pi [...]t, he hath been “ ”digging for others, he hath Justly fallen into himself;’ but to what a Degree of hardned Wickedness will he come to at last? I heartily with, he may se it in time, and Repent o [...] it; and can D. L. think, that such doings are a good pattern for his Family and Children to [...]earn by? surely if he do, such thoughts m [...]st needs proceed, from that side of his understanding, that lyes next to the Pitt of Darkness.

As for what he accuses G. F. of, in his tenth. Month's, page, about Sacrements (so called.) have never seen the book as I know of; however, this I say, I suppose th [...]y who use the outward Water-Baptism, and the outward Sup­per, or Bread and Wine, do not account it Spirituall, any more than the meats ane Drinks, and divers Washings, and Carnall ordinances, mentioned by the Apostle, in Hebrews 9.10. were so; and which were imposed on the Lords Peo­ple, till the time of Reformation.

As for G. F's saying their Communion of Bread and Wine, is the Table of Devill's; I know not to whom G. F. then spake; but if it was to such as from year to year, live in the aforementioned Practises, as Pride, vain Shews, Sports, Tables, Dice, Cards, and other Games, with Prophane Sweari [...]g and Revelling &c. So much, & too Gene­ [...]y indulged among profest Christians; surely the Cummu­nion of such [Page 25] cannot be the Communion of Saints: For as Chris [...]stom af­firms, that not God but the Devill found out Plays; and or this Reason Mant [...]a affirms it, to be unlawfull to Play at Tables and Dice▪ because invented by the Devill; and Eliberus saith, a Christian Playing at Tables or Dice [...] not to be admitted to the Holy Communion: But after a Years penence, and Abstention▪ and his totall Amendments &c. Jeremia Tailor's. Ductor Debut. &c. pa. 469 470.

As for Edward Buroughs saying that Sprinkling Infants with water, is Baptism into the Faith; is a Doctrine of Devills.

Ans. If it be not the Doctrine of Christ, Pray whose Doctrine is it then? That it is not the Doctrine of Christ, is Evident; not only because we find not any where, that ever Christ Commanded it: But also because it was not Practised by his Holy Apostles, not by their Successors, untill the third Age, or Century after Christ, as George Keith in his Serious Appeall pa. 34. assures us, and quotes, Curcelius; saying that the custom of Baptizing Infants, was brought in with­out the Command of Christ; and did not begin before the third Age after Christ was born, and that in the two former Ages, no sign of it doth appear: Now this being matter of History, 'twill be but triffling in any to say, G. K. hath retracted. Upon all which the Reader may do well to con­sider, that since it was not the Command of Christ, and seing it was set up by men 300 years after Christ, what our Blessed Saviour faith, in Math. 15.9. (viz) "In vain do they Worship me, Teaching for Doctrines the Command­ments of men; as for D. L's talk of throwing down Christ's Ordinances, is but begging the question; and as for his [Page 26] talking Papist like, of throwing down the old Religion: I say, it is not the Old nor the Older; but it's the Oldest Christian Religion, that we ought to walk in; and now whereas many lay great stress upon the Practice of Water-Baptism, and the Supper so called, because (say they) it was Practised by most Christians, from the Apostles time unto this Age &c. To this I answer, and will again bring no less Learned Historian on than G. K. himself, to prove what I say; to witt, that there were many things Practis­ed in the Church, even from the Apostles time; not only till some hundred years after Christ, but down to this ve­ry Age, as expressly Commanded in Scripture as outward Baptism, and the outward Supper, which Christians (es­pecially Protestants) do not Practise, nor account them as Gospell Ordinances; and now for proof, take a large Cita­tion out of the said G. K's Rector Corrected, beginning in pa. 67. where he, speaking of the outward Supper, puts his Adversary, (a Church of England man) to prove this, (to witt) ‘that all true Christians since the Apostles days, “have constantly continued in the Practice of that outward observation, or that all Christians did Practice it in the Apostles days; seing nothing is mentioned of it, to have been the Practice of either the Churches of the Galathians, Philippians, Collosians, or Thessalonians, in all the Scripture; and altho' many Practiced that outward Observation, so did they other things, which ye your selves do not fol­low: The believing Jews did Practice Circumcision, long after the Apostles days, Witness Eusebius. And the Seventh day of the We [...]k, was long observed also: Even among the true Christians, and abstaining from Eating Blood, did [Page 27] continue among Christians, in T [...]r [...]ulian's his days, & Wash­ing of one anothers Feet, (which Christ Commanded as ex­pressly, as that other, concerning Eating and Drinking) & also, the Anointing the Sick with Oyle; which the Church of Rome continueth unto this day, and some Christians (so called) in some Remote parts of the World, continue Cir­c [...]mcision to this day, as the Historys do confirm; and therefore the continuance of a thing, cannot simply prove the necessity of it, or that it is Commanded; for the Mis­tery of Iniquity begun to work early and soon after the A­postles days, increasing still more and more, untill the Dark night of Apostacy came on; so that the true discern­ing was in great Measure lost, what to continue, and what to leave or forsake; and they continued somthing of no Moment; as observation of Days, Meats & Drinks, and other Rites, which were but the shadows; and they discontinued, and did forsake the best things; even that, ”which was the Substance of Life it self.’ Thus far G. K. which I have taken the more Pains to transcribe, for the sake of the Sober Inquirer, who may think (because of it's being so long Practised, tho' after divers fashions, as it may be, and is made appear in Thomas Lawsors book, cal­led a Tretis concerning Baptism, that therefore it must needs be an incumbant Christian duty; if so, than and for the same reason, Washing Feet, Circumcising, Anointing with Oyle &c. must also be incombant duteis; which Protestants allow not to be such.

Well, this Postscript being much larger than at first I did expect, I must draw to a Conclusion; only to ac­quaint the Reader, that as I have herein proved D. L. on­ly [Page 28] a Perverter of our Friends words; but a False Citer, in divers respects; so also in Satans Harbinger I have done the like, in divers places; but most particularly in a Summary Collection, in pa. 104. 105. I have shewed how he had belyed our Friends, in divers particulars, as to instance two or three. First, that W. P. had said, that Christ could not pay what was not his own dept; Secondly, that Christ had a dept of his own, to satisfie God; Thirdly, that G. W. said that Christ had not the Body of Men: All which with many more, there laid [...]own, besides what's in other places of my said book, is most notoriously False; and therefore the weight of these things, particularly that of his fals­ly accusing W. P. for calling the man Christ, Finite and Impotent Creature, does stick so fast upon his Shoulders, that unless, he can be perswaded to an honest retractation, doubtless there it will stick; and however, although he did or might believe the Qua­kers to be as Erronious in their Doctrine as he renders them; yet his abusing them, in order to make them look, as they really are not, is as a Beam in his own Eye, and which he should first pull out, before he can descern the Mo [...]e in his Brothers: And untill he make satisfaction as above, for the said abuses, I hope, no indifferent Impartiall Person, our Peaceable Neigh­bours or others, but will deem us excuseable, it we should not so particularly follow him for the future, if he continue to Print against us; but reject him as a Person, whose Tongue nor Pen is no Slander; and we cannot se, that what we have hitherto done or writt against him, or G. K. can be Justly esteemed con­tentious, wrangling in us, they first Loading us, and our Christ­ian Profession with heavy abuses, Collumnies, and Slanders; so that we are but in the defencive part, in throwing them off.

C. P.
[Page 1]

An Additionall POSTSCRIPT.

SInce the above book was Printed, I have seen D. L's book, called THE REBUKER REBUKED &c. which I suppose he intended as an Answer to my book, called DA­NIEL LEEDS Justly Rebuked &c. Tho' in his Title Page, he calls his book A Brief Answer to CALEB PUSEY's S [...]r­rilo [...]s Pamphlet, Intituled, A Rebuke to DANIEL LEEDS &c. Whereas, I never writ any book under that Title; but this is not the First time D. L. has stumbled at the threshold, and this is all the use I intend to make of this his blunder, and shall let the Reader know, that as to the substance of what's materiall in his said book, it is sufficiently spoke to, and Answered in my said book; and in the foregoing Postscript: In the first, his first Challenge to me, my Letter to him in Answer thereto, and his Al­manack Challenge, (all mentiond in his Preface) is set down Verbatim; And my observations thereon, together with the Scriptures preduced by William Penn, and his Argu­ments from them, which evidently makes out, that W. P. by those words, [The Finite Impotent Creature] meant it of us Sinners, that needed Forgiveness, but not of the man Christ, that never Sinned: To which said Book and Postscript I refer the Reader, for his satisfaction in Generall, as also in particular; about what D. L. says in this book of Lies and Perversions, he pretends he hath met with in my book, and of his not meeting me, according to my Letter to him, and that about the eight Ministers attesting to the Truth of G. K's Quotations, and of his pretending the want of timely notice to meet me; and about his choos­ing [Page 2] men of his own party, and about W. P's owning Christ as man to be Finite, and about my not meeting him at Burlington, according to his Almanack Challenge, and about the three sorts of Arguments W. P. made use of; all which is sufficiently spoke to in my abovesaid Book and Postscript; but note, I said nothing in the said book of Three distinct Heads, as D. L. very falsly renders me, and says I tell a Deceitfull Story of Three distinct Heads; and then Vaunts upon his man of Straw, and says, as if W. P. wanted this Millers help, to draw this matter into heads, and Tails, se his pa. 7. where he quotes me pa. 19. but I affirm there is no such words, as Heads and Tayls either.

Obj. But in his Preface he says, that he came to Bur­lington the twelfth of May, to meet this Champion C. P. (viz.) according to his (D. L's) Challenge.

Ans. Yes, but I also observe, in his page eight he says, he could never believe I would accept of his Challenge; and indeed I know not how he should expect it: Because it was upon sush unreasonable conditions; as first, that I must not choose Quakers; secondly, that I must have one Just­ice of Peace his hand, that I designed to meet him. Besides I must give him two Months notice beforehand of it; which notice (for reasons in p. 19. of D. L. Justly Re­buked) I never gave him; therefore he had reason enough to conclude, I would not be there; so that it seems his boast of his coming to meet a Champion at Burlington, is to be understood, that he was first satisfied, he would not be there.

As for what he says of Samuell Richardson's threatning to lay him in Goal.

[Page 3] Ans. That D. L. never gave the Authority or Govern­ment, any just occasion to deal with him, I can't avouch for him: But this I can truly say, I never knew of any design among us so to deal with him.

As for what he says in pa. 9. about Robert Youngs de­manding somewhat of me, about the estate of Th [...]. Crose, I do say, that according to the utmost and best recollect­ing of my Memory that I can make, I remember nothing that ever Rob. Young said to me about it. And why did he not set down, when and where it was, what he de­manded, and what was my Answer? In pa. 8. he says. I let's him know my design was to choose Quakers, which was contrary to the terms of his challenge; and that there­fore my intentions was deceitfull, and only to Mock him.

Ans. I appeal to the candid Reader, whether this be not an abominable Abuse upon me, for he owns in his Almanack Challenge, that those words [not Quakers] were left out in the printed Copy; and being so, which way did he think I should know what was in the manuscript; therefore what silly Idle stuff is this charge of his; and as silly and Idle is it in him, where in p. 9. he tells us of a Maxim, (but possibly of his own devising) to witt, who so Labours to prove a thing to another, himself distrust it.

Ans. Does he so; then surely D. L's Friend G. K. who hath so long Labour'd to prove the Quakers no Christians, must himself distrust it. And where D. L. himself hath Labour'd so hard to prove the abovesaid charge against W. Penn, that he himself distrust's it. And possibly this might drop from him at unawares, as some product of his own experience, for he hath certainly given occasion to [Page 4] Suggest such a thing of him.

Well again I take notice, that in his pa. 10. Since I find he can't charge it as an Errour in W. Penn, for terming Christ as man Finite, without bringing G. K. and the Priests Guilty too, he ventures upon a great Falshood, and says, he did never bring it against W. P. as false D [...]ctrine, neither dared he to call it Blasphemy, (viz.) ‘I affirm “ ” Christ as man Finite and Impotent; whereas, in his book styled NEWS of a TRUMPET: So highly Magnified by himself; he tells us that W. Penn; BLASPHEMOUSLY calls the Man Christ, a Finite Impotent Creature; se his page where his No: 58. is.’

Well here is plainly seen D. L's evident partiality to the Quakers; for it seems when he would father it (as he falsly renders it) upon W. Penn, so to affirm, then it seems it must be called by D. L. Blasphemy; but now he being shown wherein G. K. and the Priest's, own as much as he would fasten upon W. Penn, now he saith, he dare not call it Blasphemy. Oh! the persidiousness of the Man.

Again, Lastly in the same page, he asserts another great falshood, where he says, I confess it, (meaning W. P's words) as charged by him D. L. which is utterly false, for I never confest any such thing; for tho' I never deny'd but owned that W. P. in pa. 21. of Sandy Foundation Shaken, termed Christ as Man Finite, yet I always did, and do still ut­terly deny D. L. his charge, (viz.) that in page 20 W: P: used such slighting and Irreverend expressions, as to call the man Christ, a Finite and Impotent Creature.

C: P:
[Page]

ERRATA

THe Reader is desired to take notice, that there is about 18 [...] [...]0 of these books dispersed without this Errata; which is not to be charged on the Author, he being wholly Ignorant of it. And where any word is not well spell'd, the Reader is desired to Correct by his Judgment, and as the sence will [...]ear.

Preface the first side line the 8th. for Pen, read Peace. l. 2 [...]. [...]. out of our Friends works, 1. of our Friends. S. 2. l. 5. f. the, r. that. l. 10. f. Indis­pensibly, r. and Indispensibly. S. 3. [...]. 27. f. the Country, r. in the Country. S. [...]. l. 3. f. pa. r. and in pa.

And in the book page 5. l. 2 [...]. f. pretended, r. himself owned. p. 8. l. 5. f. book, r. Revolution book. p. 11. l. 18. f. Attested, r. Accosted. p. 13. l. 9: 10. f. Implicit, r. any. p. 24. l. 22. f. Confutable, r. Carnall and Confu­table. pa. 26. l. 21. f. loaded, r. Taxed. p. 27. l. 10. f. it were enough to Ruin, r. might Damn. p. 29. l. 16. f. first, r. but now. p. 31. l. 20. f. bo­dy Math. 26. 12. r. body only John 14. 9. p. 41. l. 22. f. first because the Apostle saith, r. besides acc [...]rding to Christ's Doctrine. p. 50. l. [...]. f. you, r. you (meaning the Priest's) l. 23. f. in, r. as in. pa. 52. f. at, r. as. p. 53. l. 31. f. Created beings, r. Creaturely Similitudes. pa. 54. l. 23. f. proper [...]s and Created be­ings, as Persons Personall [...], r. Creaturely Similitudes, as Persons, Personall, Acts and propertys &c. l. 27. f. mean sham, r. meer System. p. 55. l. 3. f. Sistom, r. System. l. 14: [...]5. f. now is, r. is. p. 57▪ l. 6. f. least, r. least by Answering them. l. 27. f. nor, r. nor. p. 58. l. 2. f. in, r. in the. l. 6. f. keeping, r. and keeping. l. 25. f. thinks, r▪ then thinks p. 59. l. 3. f. in­deed. r. and indeed. p. 60. l. [...] f. and, r. they.

POSTSCRIPT: p. 1. l. 7. r. term me. p. 3. l. 29. f. [...]ud▪ r. and. p. 4. l. 14. [...]. for, r. but. p. 5. l. 4. f. Ligeh, r. Light. l. 18. f. Appeall, r. ac­count. l. 23. f. hear, r. so. p. 6. l. 16. f. ye search, r. search. p. 7. l. 12. f. ye search, r. search. l. 13. f. have not ye think, r. think. l. 22. f. granted. r. for granted. p. 11. l. 1. f. of, r. of his. p. 13. l. 29. f. in vain, r. vain. p. 18. l, 14. f. with him, r. with men of sence, thus to evade what is so Justly charged on him. p. 19. l. 2 [...]. f. not take, r. take. p. 22. l. 6. blott out [and therefore] l. 22. f. as great a parcell of, r. such. p. 24. l. 16. f. have, 1. I have. p. 28. l. 8. f. men, r. Man.

As for those words in pa. 4. (viz.) [Tho' his (meaning G.K's) now Masters seem not to have so much assurance of him, as to trust with making Christians] which I understand, some makes a Glamour bou [...]t, as a Falshood in me; Where [...] what I [Page]said, is Caution [...] with these words [seem not to have] and that which made [...] seem so, was, for that it was often▪ Reported, that he had but Deacons orders, and such had no Power of Sprinkling &c. which if he hath other orders or Power, I think the most that can be made of it; is, that it seem'd from those Reports, that he had not the Power which he hath; and if so, then I should and doe [...]knowledge it [...] a mistake.

C. P.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.