WHEN I first read G. K's last Sheets, miscalled Gross Error, &c. I did not think to have taken publick notice of it, and that for two Reasons. First, that tho' the said Book smote hiddenly at the Yearly Meeting, and mored directly at the People called Quakers in gene­ral, yet that the Title-page and much of the Book reflects on Three Friends by Name, whom he would single out, as leading Men in the said Meeting, and pretends, by their former Wri­tings, to make good his Charge, the least of whom, as they are far my Superiors in mana­ging of Controversie, so are they Elders in the Church of God, and whom it would have more immediately have concerned to have returned an Answer, were that to do now, both on behalf of themselves, and of the blessed Truth he hath blasphemed. But this leads me to my Second Reason, viZ. That most of the passages he finds faults with, and would labour to pervert, have been already brought by him­self in two printed Papers, (the one called, A true Copy of a Paper, &c. The other, The pre­tended [Page 4] Yearly Meeting of the Quakers, their Name­less Bull of Excommunication, &c. and refuted by T. E's, in a Book Entituled, Truth Defended, which he so far takes notice of in his Postscript, as bespeaks it was come to his Hands; for he makes some idle Observations on a passage or two, and so leaves it, which he had better have let quite alone, except he had done it more fairly, and more to purpose, and with­al makes a faint offer, that it is probable a due Answer may be given in due time to it; and that other Book of his, called a further Discovery. So that G. K. would he mind his busines, mought have found work enough upon his hands, without writing one thing twice over, who for all he once told us, when pressed to defend himself, that of making many Books there is no end, yet seems to have an itch to be doing, though it be but actum agere, rather then cope with what's ad rem, and argumentative; for till better enformed, I must assign his shifting, to a diffidence of his cause, and an uneasiness to buckle close to the work, who after all his vain flourishes, empty not of malice but mat­ter, manifests himself to be at a low ebb; his stock almost exhausted, if he be no more fruit­ful of his instances against those Friends, and others of their Brethren, that so sorry infer­ences, once before brought and found too light, are become his last refuge, and for want of more, must be repeated, though the invalidity of them hath been sufficiently laid open.

[Page 5]Now that which drew me to be concerned with him, at present, is this; As I have of late compared his former Books, with his la­ter Pamphlets; so observing in a Book, which by the difficulty of obtaining, I find to be but in few Hands, that he, in the Year, 1692. (even since his work of Division began, as I ga­ther from a paper of his Parties, signed in 1691. Reasons and Causes, p. 19.) had expressed a differ­ent sentiment of the Quakers Principles, then he hath of late; instead of enervating by argument (a work done by another Pen) his fallacy and groundless deductions, I chose to confront him by his own handy works, and detect his self-tinconsistency, with what he himself wrote, about three Years since.

The Title Page of this last, runs thus.

‘ Gross Error and Hypocrisy Detected in George Whitehead and some of his Brethren, as doth appear from the disingenuous and Hypocriti­cal answer he and some others hath given to some Queries, sent to the last Yearly Meeting of the People called Quakers, in the third Month, 1695. by comparing the said answer with the printed Books of the said George Whitehead, Willam Penn and John Whitehead, leading Men in the said Meeting; wherein the great inconsistency and contradiction of their present late Answers to the express Words and Sentences of their printed Books, is discover­ed, with a further account of their vile and pernicious Errors.’

[Page 6]The Queries he here mentions, seven in number, Indeed not transcribe, but refer to the Book it self. They are said to have been pro­posed by the Bishop of London his Chaplain (but probably were composed by G. Keith himself, or some such others Apostate) the substance was to demand our Faith relating to Christ's being in Heaven, in the Body in which he suffered, his coming therein to Judge at the last Day, the Resurrection of the Dead, and his Blood pro­pitiating for the Sins of the World. Now here what G. K. and some others in Rhode Island, say on behalf of the Quakers, in a Book of theirs, printed by William Bradford at Phila­delphia in Pennsylvania, Anno 1692. The Title is thus.

‘The Christian Faith of the People of God called in scorn Quakers, in Rhode Island (who are in Unity with all Faithful Brethren, of the same Profession, in all parts of the World) Vindicated, &c. To which is added, some Testimonies of our Ancient Friends to the true Christ of God, Note, These Collected Testi­monies were left out, in a later Impression at London, by R. Baldwin: So the Reader will not find them there. Collected out of their printed Books, for the further convincing of our Opposers, that it is (and hath been) our constant and firm belief, to expect Salvation by the MAN Christ Jesus, that was out­wardly Crucified without the Gates of Jerusalem.’

[Page 7]From whence I observe, that in the Year 1692. and before, the Quakers were found in the Faith; then G. K. with others, labour to convince our Opposers, that our belief and ex­pectation of Salvation by the Man Christ Jesus, that was outwardly Crucified without the Gates of Jerusalem, IS and HATH BEEN constant and firm, whereas now he insinuates, the leading Men (as he terms them) viz. G. W. W. P. and J. W. are inconsistent, in their present late Answers to the express words and sentiments of their printed Books. So that, with him, one while Friends former Printed Books are Au­thentick, their belief constant and firm; other while they must lye under the imputation of vile and pernitious Errours. This will be made further appear by his Epistle prefatory to the Book called, Gross Error, &c. Which begins thus.

‘The method I propose in this follow­ing Treatise, is, first, to set down the said Queries mentioned in the Title Page, next the Answers given by G. Whitehead, and Some of his Brethren, and signed by them; thirdly, the answers I have faithfully and sincerely Collected out of the printed Books of George Whitehead, William Penn and John Whitehead, that shew the great incon­sistency and contradiction of their present late answer to the express words and senti­ments of their printed Books. The which answers will also give a further account of [Page 8] their vile and pernicious Errors, opposite to some Fundamental Articles of the Christi­an Faith. And here I would have the Reader to understand, That if these men had, by their late answers, contradicted their former sayings and sentiments, from any sincere conviction, and professed ac­knowledgement of the vile and gross Errors, boldly asserted by them, in their printed Books, I should have been so far from charging them with Hipocrisy, for their so doing, that I should have commended their Ingenuity. But they are so far from any such acknowledgment, that in their late answer, they refer to the answer given by them in publick, to the objections made a­gainst them in publick. Now it is plain by their answer made in publick, they mean their Answer and Doctrine, Sayings and Sentiments contained in their printed Books; so far are they from professing or owning any real conviction they are under, of their former vile Errors. Though it is not im­probable, that some of them, and particu­larly George Whitehead, hath some contrary Apprehensions and Sentiments, in divers of these weighty matters, to what he hath for­merly, with great confidence, asserted in Print, as not only being his own Principles, but the Quakers Principles. (Though I thank God, those vile Errors, &c. which he calls the Quakers Principles, were never my [Page 9] Principles, and in Charity I am to believe, nor the Principles of divers others, that have with me gone under that Designation) — They are not so sincere as to own and retract in publick their Errors exposed in publick, even lest such Retraction or Cor­rection should lessen and abate their honour and esteem among their too credulous Fol­lowers and Admirers, who without have all doubt have suffered themselves to be too much influenced and led by them into the same Errors. And in the next page, "And however in some things of weight, it is pos­sible that G. Whitehead and some others have changed their Sentiments; yet I have no ground or reason to think otherwise, but as touching divers weighty Matters of the Christian Doctrine and Faith, he and they are still under great Blindness, Dark­ness and Error.’

This is the basis of the Work, and gives us Light into the design, of his undertaking. The vile Errors he ascribes to Friends former Sayings, Sentiments and printed Books; their Hypocrisie to their not acknowledging them; but referring to their Answers made publick, and yet allows some Reformation of Judg­ment, but not total, but that they are still under great Blindness, Darkness and Error. This Charge is extensive enough, reaching the publick Labourers, who have been Con­versant in Print, without any exception; and how wide he will stretch it to fetch in [Page 10] the rest, under the notion of credulous Fol­lowers and Admirers, himself best knows, if any. That these were not his Sentiments formerly, or at least that he hath declared otherwise, is what now lieth before me to evince, and that out of the Book, even now mentioned, called The Christian Faith, &c. for further notice I design not to take at pre­sent, of him and his mischievous Work (he being Debtor to T. E. for not offering him­self from the incongrous and absurd Infe­rences, he hath already drawn from those Friends Books) than to turn his own and his Friends Weapons upon himself. Suo se ju­gulet gladio.

In Pag. 3. G. K. and others (in order to vindi­cate the people called Quakers, from the Cal­umnies of Christian Lodowick) say, ‘Whereas divers of us, challenged by him, declared sincerely their sincere Faith, as concerning the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, and what the Holy Scriptures testifie of him, yet he did continue to accuse them still, as de­nying the true Christ, alledging, they had ano­ther Sense than the Scripture-Words did bear, and that his Sense was true, but their Sense was false, G.K. hath done the same since. appealing to their Consci­ences, whether it was not so: thus making himself Judge over our Secret Thoughts, as having a secret Sense in our thoughts of Scripture-words, page 4. con­trary to the true sense of them, [Page 11] though we have not given him or any o­ther occasion to judge so rashly, and uncha­ritably of us, and our Consciences bear us witness in the sight of God, that we do sincerely believe, and think as we speak, when we say according to the Holy Scripture, that Jesus of Nazareth is the true Christ of God, and the only true Saviour, and there is no other Name given under Heaven, where­by Men must be saved, and that this same Jesus was in fulness of Time, born of the Virgin called Mary, being conceived of the Holy Ghost, who dyed for our Sins, and rose again for our Justification—who is exalted at the Right Hand of God, and ever liveth to make Intercession for us, and that Christ hath his Body in Heaven, a most glorious Body, not changed in Being or Substance, but in condition and manner of being; and that Christ is true and per­fect God, and true and perfect Man, the Son of God, begotten of God from ever­lasting, glorified with the Father before the World began—and that Christ as Man, hath both Soul and Body, and his Man­hood is most excellently and wonderfully united with his Godhead; yet his Manhood is not his Godhead, nor is his Body that he had of the Virgin, and now hath in Hea­ven, his Godhead, but the Temple of it, as Christ called his Body the Temple, and is the GARMENT or Cloathing, ☞ wherewith [Page 12] the Eternal Word did cloath himself, who is that New and Living way, that he hath con­secrated for us, through the Vail, that is to say, his Flesh.’

‘And we believe, that God the Father hath appointed the Man Christ Jesus to be the judge of the quick and the dead, page 5. and that he is to come to judge all Mankind with the great and last Judgment at the end of the World, the which end of the World we do believe is Not come, either within us, or without us—Therefore hath this Accuser joyned with Tho. Hicks a Baptist Teacher at London, and John Faldo an Independent Teacher, and divers others, to accuse us as denying the true Christ, because we believe and confess to Christ's inward and out­ward appearance, This Charge was groundless then, how comes it to be true now? as if to believe and confess to Christ's inward Co­ming and Appearance, were certainly to deny his outward, ☞ or to hold forth two Christ's, which is but their great ignorance and unbelief, and no just Conse­quence of our Principle, for the true Christ of God is one, and the true Christian's Faith re­ceiveth and embraceth him whole and undivid­ed, and owneth his inward and outward Com­ing, who, as he did come without us in a state of Humiliation to suffer, and is risen and as­cended into Heaven, so he will come again [Page 13] without us to judge the Quick and the Dead—And there shall be a Resur­rection of the Body, both of the Just & Unjust, page 6. that is not attained already or immediately after Death, but it is to be attained unto in the time appointed of God, called the Day of Judgment. And seeing our Friends in Eng­land have FƲLLY answered to all these FALSE ACCƲSATIONS of Tho. Hicks and J. Faldo, with whom Chr. Lodowick hath joyned, we refer to their Answers, for fur­ther Satisfaction.’

Thus much on behalf, not only of him­self and his Rhode Island Friends, but of Friends in England, and every where else. Then Hicks and Faldo were false Accusers, their Consequences indeducible, Chr. Lodowick (who had, it seems, got the start of Keith both in Apostacy and Reflections) to blame for joining with them, and the Reader referred to Friends Books here, for further Satisfaction. It was then rash and un­charitable to make ones self Judge over anothers secret thoughts, to say Friends had another sense than Scripture words did bear, &c. but the Quakers are justified, even by G. Keith in their Faith concerning Christ, his Conception, Birth, Resurrection, Ascension, Intercession and Com­ing again to raise the Dead, and to Judge both Quick and Dead at the last Day; whereas since his coming over, Hicks and Faldo are vindica­ted, and Friends rendred Heterodox, even in those very Books, among the rest, out of [Page 14] which they are here by him defended as Ortho­dox. Quae te Dementia cepit! But not to dwell upon this, I now pass to that other part of their Book, which contains a Collection of Testimonies out of our Friends Books, as a fur­ther Corroboration of their evidence, for which it was added by his Printer and Brother in Schism, William Bradford, and as he saith, faithfully Collected, which let him look to.

His first citation is out of the Principles of Truth, by John Crook, whom, in his Page 10. he thus cites ‘Through this Gift we believe, that Christ Jesus, the Son of God, was ma­nifest in the Flesh, in the fulness of time — and that there is not another Name, whereby any can be saved, then this Name of Jesus Christ, nor is remission of Sins to be preached by any other Name. We be­lieve, that this Jesus Dyed for or because of Sin, and rose again for the Justification of those that believe in him, and that he there­by spoiled Principalities and Powers, and Triumphed over them openly, and led Cap­tivity captive in his own Person — By this Gift of God in our Hearts, we further believe that Christ Jesus rose again from the Dead, and sits at Gods right Hand in a Glo­rious Body. And we believe, that our low Estates and humble Bodies shall be made like unto his glorious Body — and that this mor­tal shall put on Immortality — As the Man [Page 15] is not without the Woman, neither is the Woman without the man in the Lord: even so is not the death and sufferings of Christ without at Jeru­salem, to be made void and of none effect, ☜ by any thing within; neither doth the Light shine and make that of none effect without, but both in the Lord answers his will— And we also believe the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust, according— to the Judgment of the great Day, and then shall every Seed have its own Body— But because we dare not be so foolishly inquisitive, as to say, with what Bodies do they arise, therefore do some say, We deny both the Resurrection of the Body of Christ, and of all that are or shall be dead. But this ALSO IS FALSE, for every man shall be raised in his own order, but Christ the first fruits, 1 Cor. 15.23. And we believe they shall be raised with the same Bodies, so far as Natural and Spi­ritual, Corruptible and Incorrupti­ble, ☞ Terrestrial and Coelestial can be the same.’

The next Citation I shall bring, leaving those of William Penn and George Whitehead for a close, is out of a Book called, Malice of the Independent Agent again rebuked, p. 17. p. 13. The terms Natural and Earthly, as given to the Glorious Body of Christ, were and are offensive to us. ‘It must needs be a very Glorious, Heavenly Body, and we believing such a change [Page 16] in the Glorious Body of Christ, we do not thereby (nor ever did) believe that the Bo­dy of Christ, which suffered, was annihi­lated, and that his Flesh saw Corruption: NO SƲCH MATTER: May there not be then a very Wonderful change in the Body, and yet the Substance not Annihilated nor de­stroyed? Now doth it follow, from our not believing nor owning his Characters (of Natural and Earthly) on Christ's Glorious Body, that therefore nothing of that Body Remains, or is in Being. pag. 19. As if we allowed nothing of the Man Christ, either of Spirit or Body, to have a being (after his Resurrection) to ascend, which is a HORRID FALSHOOD—Though Christ be God and Man, in a most Glorious Uni­on and Power, yet the Manhood is not the Deity, nor the Deity the Manhood, yet in­separable in the Heavenly Man, Christ, who is Lord from Heaven.’

I come now to what he quotes out of my Father, whom he represents as sounder in the Faith, than a late litigious Agent in G. K's cause ( Thomas Crisp, I mean) hath sought to Characterize him. It is in these Words, ‘ Flesh and Blood of Christ, by J. Penington (Preface) I have often hard them, pag. 15. the Quakers) own Christ both in­wardly and outwardly; yea, I heard one of the Antients of them thus Testify in a publick Meeting, many Years since, That [Page 17] if Christ had not come in the Flesh, in the ful­ness of time, to bear our Sins in his own Body on the Tree, and to offer himself up a Sacrifice for Mankind, all Mankind had utterly Perisht. page 16. Glorious was that Appearance and Manifestion of his Son in the Flesh, precious his subjection and Holy Obedi­ence to the Father: his giving himself up to death for Sinners, was of great esteem in his Eye. It was a spotlses Sacrifice, of great value, and effectual for the Remission of Sins, and I do humbly acknowledge unto the Lord, ☞ the Remission of my Sins there­by.’

Robert Barclay, comes next, who is brought in saying, Apology, pag. 94, 95, 96. p. 16. ‘As we believe he [Christ] was a true and real Man, so we also believe, that he con­tinues SO to be Glorified in the Heavens in Soul and Body, by whom God shall judge the World in the great and general Day of Judgement. We believe all those things to have been certainly transacted, which are recorded in the Holy Scriptures, concerning the Birth, Life, Miracles, Suffer­ings, Resurrection and Ascension of Christ, and we also believe; that it is the Duty of every one to believe it, to whom it plea­seth God to reveal it; yea, we believe it were Damnable Ʋnbelief not to believe, when SO declared. And we believe that the Remission of Sins, ☞ which any par­take [Page 18] of, is ONLY in and by virtue of that most Satisfactory Sacrifice, and no other­wise; Vindication of Apology; page 89. I do believe that the Body of our Lord Je­sus Christ, which was Crucified at Jeru­salem, was again raised by the Power of God, in which Glorious Body the Lord Jesus Christ DWELLETH, page 189. We are falsly charged with denying the outward appearanee of Christ, the real Existance, of Heaven and Hell, as a place without us, the last and general Judgment, the Resurrection of the Body; for we REALLY believe these things.’

The following citation with others com­prehends William Penn, one of them G. K. hath traduced by name, ‘ Testimony for the Man Christ Jesus, pag. 11. 12. page 4 (saith W. B.) and cites William Penn, where he speaks in the name and person of the Quakers, thus, We do believe the Man Christ Jesus to be Glorified in Heaven: We do believe that holy Manhood to be Glorified in Heavenly Glory. ☞ See now how far the Quakers are from denying the true and real Manhood of Christ in Heaven, or disowning Jesus of Nazareth to be the Missiah. And we further add and confess, that the same Man Christ Jesus, that Suf­fered and was put to Death in the Flesh — ascended both as to a change of place and state of Glory, — and that the same [Page 19] Body, that was put to Death, was raised by the Power of God, and was a REAL Body, really seen both before and after his Resurrection, and at his Ascension also. So we confess the same Man Christ, not only to be still in being, but also Glorified, and his Body to be a Glorious, Heavenly and Spiritual Body. And as to his being MAN, We have one Mediator between God and Man, even the Man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim. 2. And God will judge the World in Righteousness by that Man whom he hath or­dained, whom he hath raised from the Dead, ☜ Act. 17.31. So that this Man Christ did neither vanish nor perrish in any thing essential to him, either as to his SPIRIT, SOƲL or BODY, but is highly exalted and Glorified, Page 12. But if we shall be­changed, as to our low Body, and fashion­ed into a Glorious Spiritual state; then is Christ, as to his Body, changed or trans­lated into a far more Glorious State than what it had, when on Earth.’

I have reserved his Quotations out of George Whitehead, to the last. ‘They are these Postscript by G. W. (to a Book entituled Malice of the Independent Agent again rebuked) in answer to W. H's Queries, page 23. page 13. That Flesh saw no Corruption, but was raised from the Dead. Christ did rise in that Body wherein he Suffered, and in the same [Page 20] ascended into the Heavens, where the Patriarch David did not, as to his Body, which is in the Sepulchre, Acts 2.29. And that VERY BODY of Christ, which was raised from the Dead, how should it but be in being, seeing he dyed not again, according to Rom. 6.9. Knowing Christ be­ing raised from the Dead, dyeth no more, Death hath no more dominion over him: his dying was only as to the Body, he was put to death as concerning the Flesh, therefore the Flesh was raised from the dead. And it is, so far circumscribed or encompassed in the Heavens, as its capable of; and as is proper to it: and tho' it be Spiritual and Glorious, yet a Body, and therefore not in every place, where God is. To be Omni­present is only proper to God, and not to Bodies. And in the next page, he adds: page 14. He is entred into Heaven it self, to appear in the Face of God for us. And a little lower, out of The real Quakers, a real Protestant by G. W. page 105, 106. 'I deny it to be the Qua­kers mind that Christs Body did vanish, (so as to become annihilated) at his Ascension: 'twas changed, and more Glorified, but not vanisht. I am sensible that none in their right understanding or sense, would give him any such mistaken answer or account concerning the Body of Christ, that it so vanisht, as to become annihilated. Christ [Page 21] hath a Glorious Body, most near and proper to himself, above and more excellent than all our earthly Bodyes, like unto which he will change our low and humble Bodies. And out of pag. 108. of the same Book, that, 'We believe that Christ as Mediator; hath obtain­ed eternal redemption for us, and that by his OWN BLOOD, that we might be san­ctified and redeemed from all Iniquity, for which end he gave himself for us. Again, Christ and his Light within are not to be divided in matter of Faith or Salvation. pag. 15. ☞ We never opposed Christ who dyed for Sinners, or Faith in his Name; by believing or obeying the Light within.’ Out of another Book of G. W's, called Judgment fixed, in Answer to Jeffry Bullock, he brings a quotation thus, ‘The true Christ of God is but one, tho' he hath appeared in divers manners; both in the Flesh and in the Spirit—he is the one Medi­ator between God and Man, even the MAN Christ Jesus the heavenly glorious Man, the MAN that was promised to be for a hiding place—that MAN by whom God will judge the World in Righteousness.’ See also, Plea of the Innocent, by G. K. and T. B. pag. 10. accusation out of G. W. in Answer to Jeffry Bullock, thus, ‘Thou who canst not see the consistency of Salvation by the Light with­in, and the Man Christ Jesus, all gone from the Light into Imaginations.’

[Page 22]Thus much out of G. W. as gathered by W. B. and made part of that Book, called, The Christian Faith of the People of God, called Quaker in Rhode Island, &c. And enough to shew wh [...] G. W. and his Brethren, their for­mer Sentiments were, in those weighty Points there controverted, and that G. K. is a false Accuser. Now hear W. B. summs up the matter, pag. 16. at the close, ‘Much more might have been cited out of the Writings of our Antient Friends, but this may suffice, at this time, to convince our Opposers, that it hath been, and is, the firm Belief of the People called Quakers, to expect Salvation by the Man Christ Jesus, who was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified for our Sins, and rose again for our Justi­fication, ascended into Heaven, and ever liveth to make Intercession for us.’ So that it seems, if we will believe these Men, or they dare believe themselves, the Quakers were then Orthodox ( viz. Anno 1692.) and what they had formerly delivered as their Faith, was sound; they did sincerely believe and think as they spake; a taste ye have here, and MUCH MORE might be given, but this may suf­fice to Convince our Opposers, if W. B. be to be credited. But how much worse than those our Opposers, must that Man then be, who, all this notwithstanding, represents them other­wise then they are, or he hath defended them [Page 23] to be even a Traducer, a Defamer, yea, a Judas!

This shaking the Foundation, upon which G. K's whole superstructure is built, (in his late envious piece, stiled Gross Error &c.) as is Manifest from so much of the Preface, as I have cited, I shall leave G. K. to reconcile himself to himself and his Friends, and refer the Reader, for answer to the particular charges there exhibited, to that Book of T. E's, called, Truth Defended, wherein, I doubt not, but the judicious and impartial will receive Satis­faction, in finding most of the Citations, In­ferences and Cavils, brought in this last of G. K's, already fully cleared and answered there.