1696.' like it; and of that little that was faid by any of thofe few Quakers that were prefent, most

was to the People (tending to fhew them the 'Unreasonableness of his Undertaking, and defiring them to reserve one Ear for the other Side) very little of it to him.'

Then he goes on to fhew G. Keith's Falfhood, in calling it An exact Narrative; and yet not inferting the Reafons why our Friends did not appear, which he confeffes were read; and his Fallacies in evading them, which therefore T. Ellwood fets down, obviates G. Keith's Quibbles on them: So proceeds to answer his Narrative, clearing the Quotations he brought out of our Friends Books, from his Perverfions (being either unfairly or falfly quoted, or perverted in their Senfe to what they never intended, according to his carping and cavilling Way.) Vindicating the Soundness of their Doctrine, fhewing G. Keith's. Self-contradictions (in oppofing what he had fo often vindicated as Orthodox; and yet pretending to hold the fame Doctrines and Principles ftill) and laying open his Deceit, Falfhood and Prevarications fo plainly and effectually, that G. Keith never replied to it; and good reason why, because he could not to the Purpose, being an'fwered home and defeated in all his vile Pretences, envious Cavils, and false Accufations.

But being pinch'd and driven to a Nonplus, by Quotations out of his own Books in Favour of what he oppofed, which he could not anfwer; wherein he had afferted or defended the fame Doctrines and Principles, in as plain or higher

higher Words, which he now blamed Friends 1696. for as grofs Errors, &c. Which yet he would Y not allow to be fo in himself, but paliated them under the foft Term of Miftakes; faying, NarIrative, pag. 15. I know not any fundamental Principle, nor indeed any one Principle of Chriftian Faith, that I have varied from to this Day, ever fince I came among the Quakers, which is about Thirty-three Years ago. And in his Preface to his Narrative, pag. 6. he fays, The Things (he does not call them Errors, nor hardly ever uses the Word Error with respect to himself and his own Writings.-) that need Correction in my Books, compared with the vile Errors in theirs, are but as my Motes to their Beams:

Nor are

they fuch Things as oppofe any Chriftian Principles of Faith; but of an inferior Nature. [and yet they were as full in the Points, as any he could cite out of ours.] And in The true Copy of a Paper, printed 1694, where, in pag. 17. he faintly intimates a Purpose to publish fome short Explication, &c. of Jome Words and Paffages in his former Books. He adds, For upon a Review of my fomer Books,-I freely acknowledge, I have found fome Paffages and Words, that not only need fome farther Explanation; but even in fome Part, an Emendation and Correction. • How gently doth he touch himself? (fays T. Ellwood) How foftly doth he handle his own Sores? Not a Syllable of Errors or Herefy there; no, the ⚫ hardest Word he can afford to give them, is, his former Miftakes.' And left the Reader hould extend them too far, he explains it in

the

1696. the next Page, faying, Upon the most impartial Search I have made, I find not any Caufe to correct either my Judgment or Books, as touching any of the great Doctrines and Principles of the Chriftian Religion; nor do I know that 1 am of another Faith in any one Principle of Chriftian Doctrine, contrary to what I believed, ever fince I went under the Profeffion of a Quaker, fo called. With much more to the fame Purpose.

Thus partial was he as to himself, notwithftanding his loud Clamours and Outcries of vile Errors against the Quakers, for the fame Things he had held himself, which yet were no Errors in him; fuch a Hypocrite was he to diffemble with God and Man. So that when he found his Doctrines compared with what he accused Friends of, and faw they were the fame or parallel; 'twas to no purpofe for him to go to vindicate or clear himself of what was fo notorious; And therefore procured another, or at leaft he undertook it for him, under Disguise of the Snake in the Grass: And fo to flide by the Quotations out of his Books, that lay in his Way; which would have been a Shame for G. Keith to do (a Snake in the Grass indeed) pretending in his Preface, that it was not meant as a Defence of George Keith, any further than be defended the Truth of the Chriftian Faith; for which Reafon (fays he) I have wholly omitted all the perfonal Reflections caft upon him, and the Contradictions which Thomas Ellwood pretends to find in his former Books (while he was a Quaker of their Communion) to the Doctrine be

погу

now fets up in Oppofition to them. And fo gave 1696. the go-by to whatever pincht him, which was the Defign, as T. Ellwood cbferves, to help G. Keith off at a dead Lift, from his manifold and manifeft Self- contradictions, which it was impoffible for him to reconcile or defend; and because it had been as abfurd for him to have undertaken a Reply to T. Ellwood's Answer, and not have attempted to acquit himself of those Contradictions charged upon him therein, as it would have been impoffible for him to have clear'd himself of them. Therefore this Contrivance was found out, that another (or perhaps he in a Mask, under the Difguife of another, for Satan, though difrob'd from his Disguise of Light, has many black Robes and dark Disguises to put on) should undertake the Tafk of replying (for a Task it seems it was) upon fuch a Foot, and under fuch Circumftances, as might give him fome colourable Pretence to wave the Contradictions, and wholly to omit them, and with them, whatsoever elfe, he found too hard. to meddle with.

So that any one might plainly fee this was a Contrivance (as our Friend T. Ellwood obferves) to help G. Keith out at a dead Lift. To which Book of the Snake's, T. Ellwood writ an Answer, though he did not quite finish it, or publish it: Of which, and that Controverfy, he gives the following Account.

This Crontroverfy begun by George Keith (upon a Pick he took against the People called Quakers; because they could not answer his * ambitious.

1696. ambitious Defire of Rule, nor receive fome wild and fantastical Notions of his) has been carried on by him in his own Name, 'till he 'could go no further. The Doctrines he con' demns us for as erroneous and heritical, have 'been either fo clearly caft off by us as Slanders, or so rivetted on himself by undeniable Inftances and Proofs taken out of his own Books, that (having fore-closed his Way to a Retraction of them, as fhall be fhewed anon) ' he had no Way left, but as his last Shift, to 'fhift the Cause into another's Hand; to carry it on under the Difguife of another Perfon; which brought to my Mind the Fable of Achelous, who being too weak for his Antagonift in fair Force, was fain to fhift from one Shape to another; firft to that of a Snake, then to that of a Bull; and is thereupon. brought in by the Poet; faying,

Inferior Virtute, meas divertor ad Artes
Elaborque Viro, Longum formatus in Anguem, &c.
Metam. lib. 9. Fab. 1.

In Strength too weak, I to my Wiles betake,
And flide from Man into a twining Snake.

• Somewhat a like crafty Course has G. Keith 'taken; who finding himself over prest the last 'Year with Books, which he knew not how to 'anfwer, got, as was fuppofed, an Adjutant of his to publish a Book against us under Disguife, without a Name to it, and with the

very