The Philadelphian Society was a small group of chiliastic mystics led by an elderly widow, Mrs Jane Lead. The name ‘Philadelphian’ derives from the sixth of the seven Churches of Asia to which Christ, at the beginning of the Apocalypse, sends messages. It is clear from the text, if one reads it as a prophecy of successive ages of the Church, that the Philadelphian Church is to be the one which has preserved the true spirit of Christ, and which will be there at His second coming. In consequence, chiliasts have always been inclined to call themselves Philadelphians, as did, for example, Joachim of Flora.¹ This movement also made use of the meaning of the word in Greek: brotherly love.

In about 1674 Mrs Lead, then aged fifty, became closely asociated with Dr John Pordage and his wife, visionary mystics who were deeply influenced by Jakob Boehme.² In 1654 Pordage had been turned out of his living on the charge of having commerce with spirits. He himself admitted to being molested by evil spirits, and claimed that from 1653 to 1658 he had had direct experience of the torments of hell.³ He transmitted to Mrs Lead his simplified version of Boehmenism, which we know about from his posthumously published Theologia Mystica (1684) and from works later translated into German by another Boehmenist and Philadelphian, Loth Fischer of Utrecht.⁴

From 1681 Mrs Lead published a series of visions or revelations,⁵ and, on Pordage's death in that year, she became the accepted leader of the movement. In 1694 appeared her Enochian Walks with God, in which she first expounded the doctrine of universal salvation, revealed to her several years before.⁶ In the same year Loth Fischer published a German translation of her The Heavenly Cloud now Breaking (1681), and this led to a correspondence between Mrs Lead and Baron Freiherr von Knyphausen, a highly placed administrator at the court of Frederick III Elector of Brandenburg.⁷ Knyphausen, already a patron of the Petersens,⁸ gave her financial support and paid Fischer a salary to translate all her works, which, from 1694 onwards, were published in German in Amsterdam usually in the same year as the English edition. At this time she was joined by two new followers, both Fellows of St John's College Oxford: Francis Lee and Richard Roach.

Francis Lee, who had studied medicine at Leiden and Padua and was a good Hebrew scholar, was a non-juror, and therefore, though in orders, was unable to hold a living or a post at the University. On his way back from his continental studies, in 1694, he heard tell of Mrs Lead in Holland, where Fischer's translation of her treatise had already aroused interest. He called on her in London and soon became her devoted disciple.⁹ In 1695 Mrs Lead went completely blind, and Lee acted as her secretary, dealing with the now heavy religious correspondence from Holland and Germany, editing her writings and providing prefaces for them.¹⁰ In the next year Mrs Lead had a revelation that it was God's will that Lee should marry her widowed daughter, Mrs Barbara Walton, a proposal which Baron Knyphausen also seconded vigorously. After anxious consideration Lee was convinced that this was indeed the will of God, they were married, and all three settled in a house in Hoxton Square, rented by Mrs Lead at Knyphausen's expense.¹¹

Richard Roach had been a friend of Lee's since their school-days together at Merchant Taylor's,¹² and Lee must quite soon have introduced him to Mrs Lead; for in 1695 she wrote to him at St John's to inform him that he had been designated by the Virgin Wisdom as a ‘priest in her orb’—Mrs Lead had been¹³

commanded to lead you up with some others to the High Court of the Princely Majesty who sealed you a commission to go forth in the Power of a Holy-Ghostly Ministration.

Roach did in fact become a very active member of the Philadelphians, and led the movement after Mrs Lead's death in 1704.¹⁴ In the late 1720's he was still faithfully expounding the Philadelphian message. From his ordination in 1690 until his death in 1730 he was Rector of St Augustine's in Hackney.¹⁵ This fact testifies to the remarkable tolerance of the Church of England.

Until 1697 the Philadelphians were a small, informal society, holding regular private meetings at Mrs Lead's house in Hoxton Square or at the home of Mrs Openbridge and Mrs Bathurst in Baldwin Gardens.¹⁶ Their meetings were conducted in a manner similar to the Quakers', that is to say, there were no set rules of procedure and everyone waited in silence until the spirit moved someone to speak.¹⁷ Although Dr Pordage had had a violent anti-Quaker revelation in 1675,¹⁸ the Philadelphians recognized the similarity between the two movements, but also pointed out the few but important differences: the Philadelphians set no store by simplicity of dress and forms of speech, they were anxious not to be sectarian and remained practising members of the established Church, they believed in the imminence of the millennium, and their leader, and some but not all of their members, believed in universal salvation.¹⁹ Although Boehmenism was certainly the most important single influence on their religious outlook, it was not the only one. The Philadelphians felt themselves close to contemporary continental mystics—German Pietists, Antoinette Bourignon (another protégée of Knyphausen's) and Pierre Poiret, French Quietists, Christian Cabalists, and may well have absorbed some of their views.²⁰ In principle, of course, the main source of their religion was direct inspiration and revelation by God; but, unless we accept that God and the whole invisible world are in fact as Boehme, Pordage and Mrs Lead described them, we may leave this source out of account.

Mrs Lead's visions derive unmistakably from Pordage's Boehmenism, and Boehme may well be the main source of the Philadelphians' chiliasm, which looked for the preparation of the millennium in the gradual purification and unification of the Protestant churches, rather than in the sudden and violent destruction of the forces of Antichrist.²¹ When Mrs Lead tells us that it is by direct mystical experience that she knows about the still sphere of eternity, which ‘there is no way possible for anyone to describe, or give account of, but by being taken up into it’, and then gives us a picture of its contents, the Trinity, the Virgin Wisdom, the seven superplanetary spirits, and so forth, we cannot help thinking that she could quite as easily have read it all in Pordage's Theologia Mystica, for which she wrote a preface.²² But some of her visions have a more genuine ring. On the 17th of October 1695, for example, she was watching the progress of a recently deceased friend, and noticed that she had passed through the elementary regions:

Then Paradise being open'd. I searched for her, and after about two hours, I found her in the Third Degree of this Heavenly World. … As soon as I had met her, I congratulated her, and said, I have been a long while seeking to find you. To which she Answer'd, very well you might; for I have been so taken up with the Variety of the Pleasures of this Place, that I had forgot all my Mortal Friends.

Mrs Lead reminded her that she, Mrs Lead, had often assured her that death would lead to great joys;²³

Upon which she smilingly said, Now I find it so to be. And so seeming to be unwilling to entertain any further Discourse with me, as if thereby she was held from a better Enjoyment, she left me.

Another revelation which Mrs Lead certainly did not get from Boehmenism was that of universal salvation. Indeed Boehmenism is the main obstacle to her working out a satisfactory theology to support this doctrine. One of the salient features of Boehme's philosophy is the attempt to solve the problem of evil by putting the origin of evil, the dark fiery principle, into the godhead, where, before creation, it was harmlessly harmonized with its opposite, the principle of light. In the creation the dark fire comes forth as sin in fallen angels and men, and as avenging anger in God.²⁴ Sin and punishment thus have eternal roots, and the eternity of hell has a strong metaphysical basis. Already in Pordage's Theologia Mystica there is an effort to tone down the dualism of Boehme's God by emphasizing that the fiery principle was wholly good until abused by the free will of angels and men.²⁵ But the dualism still persists in Mrs Lead and involves her in obvious inconsistencies when she is arguing in favour of universal salvation.

One of her main arguments, which we have already met in Jeremiah White, is that sin begins in time and therefore cannot be eternal. In the Enochian Walks we read:²⁶

Behold, saith the Lord, ‘I will make all things new, the End shall return to its Original-Primary-Being … for as there was neither Sin, nor Center to it, so it must be again …’

Yet in the same work, when dealing with the origin of evil, she states that before the creation God²⁷

had all Principles and Centres, both of Light and Darkness in Himself; with Good and Evil, Death and Life. But all of These (tho seeming contrary) were bounded in Unity and Harmony.

Mrs Lead herself realized that universal salvation went against Boehmenist principles and against his express assertion of the eternity of hell; but she made no attempt to resolve the conflict, merely remarking that in Boehme's day the time was not yet ripe for this revelation.²⁸

Francis Lee, in his apologia for Mrs Lead's theology sent to Henry Dodwell in 1699, states the conflict clearly and resolves it by denying the dualism.²⁹ The ‘finiteness of hell torments’, he says,

is absolutely inconsistent with the origin of good and evil from two co-eternal principles, in the Deity. For if they are co-eternal a parte ante, they must necessarily be co-eternal a parte post, and consequently the torments of hell must be as infinite as the joys of heaven …

Conversely, the doctrine of eternal torment necessarily implies a Manichaean God, ‘an eternal principle of evil, as well as of good, that is, an eternal root and cause of hell in the Deity’. He then argues that, since universal salvation and dualism are quite incompatible, and since Mrs Lead has ‘so professedly expressed herself in favour of the former, and never professedly in favour of the latter’, she must be absolved from the charge of Boehmenist dualism. This argument is valid only on the extremely doubtful assumption that Mrs Lead was incapable of holding two logically incompatible beliefs.

Although Mrs Lead cannot have derived the doctrine of universal salvation from Boehme, the setting of the vision in which this doctrine was revealed to her is still clearly Boehmenist. She saw first an innumerable multitude of the dead, who were imprisoned in ‘dark Centres’ and were bewailing their failure, while on earth, to profit by the redeeming love of Christ. She was then led into a ‘Light-World’, where she saw Christ interceding with God the Father, and also Adam and Eve. She noticed many spirits, like bright flames, flying rapidly into this light-world, and asked who they were. Christ answered

These are they for whom my blood was shed, although they have lain long swallowed up and imprisoned in the second death, and have passed through many bitter struggles and deathly fears; but now behold! how, set at liberty, they come here so that they may be clothed with new bright bodies.

Thereupon she saw Adam and Eve stand up with great jubilation and heard them say:

In this wise shall the whole race of our descendants be restored, and one after another come in here to us.

Mrs Lead went up to Adam and asked him how it could be possible for all these wicked souls to be saved; he replied,

The second Adam, the Lord of heaven, is more than sufficient to heal the breach that was made through me.

As she was still not quite convinced, Christ drew her spirit near to Him and said:

If thou art amazed at this full and complete redemption of my human creatures, what wilt thou then say when the love of the immeasurable godhead reveals itself yet more wonderfully and deeply. …

And He went on to reveal to her the eventual restoration of Satan and his angels.³⁰

We may reasonably assume that this vision had human as well as divine sources; indeed, just before recounting it, Mrs Lead states that she had already heard of the doctrine and had rejected it.³¹ Since a Boehmenist source is ruled out, we have the following probable sources, from any or all of which she may have heard of universal salvation. Rust's defence of Origen is cited in Lee's preface to the Revelation of the Everlasting Gospel-Message,³² in which the above vision appears, and it is quoted at length in Roach's preface to White's Restoration.³³ But perhaps more likely are Lady Conway and Van Helmont, whose religious outlook, combining Quakerism and Cabalism, had close affinities with the Philadelphians' mysticism and chiliasm. In their short-lived periodical, Theosophical Transactions by the Philadelphian Society (1697), one of the very few books advertised, apart from Mrs Lead's publications, is Lady Conway's Principles of the most Antient and Modern Philosophy.³⁴ In the last number of the Transactions appeared ‘A Theosophical Epistle from a Learned Gentleman Living very Remote from London, to One of the Undertakers of these Transactions, upon the Receiving the first of them’.³⁵ The author of this letter is a Lurianic Cabalist, he quotes from the Kabbala Denudata, and he advocates universal salvation; I think it more than likely that he is Van Helmont.

Whatever Mrs Lead's sources may have been, if any, she certainly set her own stamp on the doctrine of universal salvation by making it part of her chiliastic programme. In defence of this doctrine she was able to exploit an element already present in chiliastic tradition,³⁶ namely, the belief that in the Last Days there will be a new revelation of religious truth, that the ‘Everlasting Gospel’, which the angel in the Apocalypse is to preach to all nations (Rev. XIV, 6), is not identical with the New Testament, but something new and surprising added to it or discovered in it. This new truth, the salvation of all men and all angels, is both a sign of the nearness of the Parousia and a means of bringing it about. The preaching of this new revelation of the infinite extent of God's love will produce such a wave of true repentance and regeneration that there will soon be a sufficient body of purified souls for Christ to begin His millennial reign; the bride will be ready and the bridegroom will not tarry, the temple will be built and its High Priest will come soon to sanctify it,³⁷

For the day has now broken and the blessèd year has come, when by the casting of this golden Love-Net such an innumerable multitude of souls will be caught, such a draught landed, that they will complete the structure of the spiritual Temple-Body.

In spite of this optimistic faith in the happy consequences of preaching universal salvation, Mrs Lead, and those of the Philadelphians who accepted the doctrine, were well aware that it was generally considered that such preaching would have disastrous moral results. Henry Dodwell, in the letter of 1698 which called forth Lee's apologia, wrote, after an account of Mrs Lead's heresies:³⁸

But in this age of licentiousness, there is hardly any doctrine of hers of more pernicious consequence than that of her pretending Divine revelation for her doctrine concerning the finiteness of hell torments.

Lee replied that other Christian truths are liable to abuse—he gives no examples, but we may suppose that he was thinking on the same lines as Camphuysen. He also argued that, from the lateness of Origen's condemnation, one might presume that universal salvation was an orthodox doctrine in the first three centuries,³⁹

or if it were not then publicly known as a general doctrine, but reserved only, among some few that were initiated into the mysteries, it doth not thence appear that it ought not to be published now; or that it is unsound, because unfit for every age.

We have here a variant of Mrs Lead's connection between chiliasm and universal salvation: the Everlasting Gospel is not a new revelation, but an esoteric truth which now, in these Last Days, is to replace the exoteric doctrine.

Mrs Lead herself returns constantly to this all-important objection to universal salvation. Her main defence is to emphasize the duration and severity of hell-torments, in particular the bitter regret of the wicked who, for want of a little effort in this short life, have missed the millennium and perhaps whole Ages of heavenly bliss. For unexplained reasons, moral progress in the afterlife is much slower than in this life; it is therefore very much in our interest to achieve salvation here and now. Mrs Lead addresses thus the sinners whom Christ will cast into outer darkness:⁴⁰

Admit there should be a Delivery, out Here, at the End of all Generations, and Ages; Yet how numerous years may you abide in These Purging and Trying Furnaces; one Day (Here, while in the Body) would have set forward your work more, than Years in those Centers, where you are to be confined …

These punishments are of course appropriately graded. Totally unregenerated souls, who have been deeply infected by ‘all that is Diabolical’, go to the ‘Dark Hellish World’,

with all those Punishments, that the Evil Angels will delight to inflict upon them.

Less wicked ones go to less painful worlds, watery or aerial.⁴¹ It is not quite clear whether the torments will be only mental; it is certainly on these that she lays most weight, but the descriptions just quoted suggest physical pain as well.

Mrs Lead's afterlife is intensely dynamic. The blessèd as well as the damned move up through successively higher and happier worlds, and this progress has no end, even for those who have reached the highest world; for God

does multiply amongst them most Amazing, and renewed Wonders, which gives perpetual Matter to renew Love-Admirations.

These saints and angels are also occupied with helping less fortunate souls to rise in the hierarchy. Even during this life angels sometimes draw up our souls into heaven,⁴²

being very affable and friendly to shew their Princely Thrones, and their delightful solaces and enjoyments they have from the perpetual motion of the Triune Deity.

The greatest saving work done by angels will be among their fallen fellows. When the last human souls have been freed from hell by the redeeming power of Christ's sacrifice, Satan and his angels will find themselves ‘bereft of all their fierce fiery power’, with no more subjects to rule and torment;

This will powerfully abase their pride and arrogance, and effect an inconceivable softening of their fierce obstinacy.

God will then dispatch the good angels to convert their now humbled former companions, assisted by the ubiquitous Virgin Wisdom, who, as the mother of all spirits, retains ‘a maternally kind heart’ towards even her diabolic progeny.⁴³

As for all Origenists, this salvation of devils was for Mrs Lead a troublesome part of the doctrine. She could find no scriptural evidence for it, and it cost her the support of Johann Georg Gichtel, one of the leading German Boehmenists of this period, who, up to this time, was a friend of Loth Fischer, Mrs Lead's translator. According to Gichtel, Mrs Lead had at first believed that the devils, like men, were to be saved by the sacrifice of Christ, and had written a letter to this effect to the Petersens. Gichtel thereupon sent to her objections to this doctrine and these led her to alter it in favour of the mode of salvation described in the Revelation of the Everlasting Gospel-Message and outlined above.⁴⁴ These objections were as follows. First, the salvation of devils is incompatible with the true Boehmenist doctrine of the eternity of the fire-anger principle in God;⁴⁵ Gichtel implies that universal human salvation would not be incompatible, though he never overtly maintains this doctrine. Second, in order to redeem devils, Christ would have to be incarnated into a snakelike body; the angelic bodies of Satan and his angels had been changed at their Fall into monstrous, writhing bodies made of worms, which Gichtel himself had seen in a vision.⁴⁶ The first objection was valid, and, as we have seen, Mrs Lead could only evade it by inconsistencies. The second objection she dealt with by saving the devils through God the Father, using the angels as instruments. This solution Gichtel rejected on the grounds that, if no incarnation were necessary to save angels, none was necessary to save men.⁴⁷ In any case, the fact that Mrs Lead's revelations were thus shown to be variable, adjustable to criticism, proved for him that they were not genuine.⁴⁸

Apart from her unconvincing account of the salvation of devils, and her Boehmenist dualism, Mrs Lead had other defects as a propagandist of universal salvation. Her style, with its oddly Germanic word-order, is unnatural, ungrammatical and often obscure. The various Boehmenist entities, especially the Virgin Wisdom,⁴⁹ who is dangerously near to pushing her way into the Trinity, make her theology untidy and unnecessarily unorthodox. But more important still, the chances of her Origenist and chiliastic messages being received by Protestants must have been gravely diminished by her Quaker-like reliance on the direct inspiration of the Spirit and consequently casual attitude to scriptural authority. In her treatise, The Wonders of God's Creation Manifested in the Variety of Eight Worlds, as they were made known experimentally to the Author (1695), she deals with the objection, that none of these worlds is mentioned in the Bible, by putting forward a Joachimite division of ages of revelation: the Father inspired the Old Testament, the Son the New, and now it is the turn of the Holy Ghost,⁵⁰

which will excel all before it, to Unseal and Reveal what yet never was known or understood, that will be communicated to and by such as are in an extraordinary manner sanctified and set apart for this Holy Function,

that is, to and by such as Mrs Lead. Two years later, in the Everlasting Gospel-Message, she does attempt to give scriptural support to her revelation, and is seriously worried by the lack of it for the salvation of devils.⁵¹ But by that time the conversion of the Petersens had occurred and she must have known that her failure to provide scriptural evidence nearly prevented their accepting universal salvation.

Notes

1. See Ernst Benz, Ecclesia Spiritualis, Stuttgart, 1934, p. 298.

2. Mrs Lead first knew Pordage in 1663; see her preface to Pordage's Theologia Mystica, London, 1683, p. 2. Cf. Nils Thune, The Behmenists and the Philadelphians, Uppsala, 1948, pp. 60-2.

3. See Pordage, Göttliche und Wahre Metaphysica, Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1715, Bd. III, p. 10: ‘kam zu mir von dem Geist der Ewigkeit folgendes Wort mit grosser Krafft und Gewalt: Werffet diesen unnützen knecht hinaus in die äusserste Finsternüsz / alwo ist Weinen / Heulen und Zähnklappen. Sobald dieses Wort gesprochen / ward ich in das finstere Centrum eingenommen / darinn ich fünf gantzer Jahre lang herum zirkulirte / ehe ich daraus erlöset wurde’; cf. ibid., Bd. II, Einleitung, c. 7, and Francis Lee's correspondence in Christopher Walton, Notes and Materials for an adequate Biography of the celebrated Divine and Theosopher, William Law, London, 1854, pp. 192, 204.

4. See Thune, op. cit., p. 99.

5. Beginning with The Heavenly Cloud now Breaking; cf. Thune, op. cit., pp. 79 seq.

6. Jane Lead, The Enochian Walks with God, London, 1694, Introduction and pp. 17-9, 35-7; she states, in Eine Offenbarung der Bottschafft des Ewigen Evangelii, Amsterdam, 1697, p. 27, that she waited several years before publishing the doctrine.

7. See Thune, op. cit., p. 81.

8. V. infra, p. 232.

9. See Thune, op. cit., pp. 82-3; C. Walton, op. cit., pp. 141, 508.

10. See Thune, op. cit., p. 85; C. Walton, op. cit., pp. 233 seq. Several of the prefaces are signed ‘Timotheus’.

11. See Thune, op. cit., pp. 85-6; C. Walton, op. cit., pp. 226-7, 508.

12. See Dict. Nat. Biogr., art. ‘Roach’.

13. Bodleian, Rawlinson MS., D 832, fo 51; the letter is undated, but in it Mrs Lead speaks of 1696 as next year.

14. See Thune, op. cit., p. 135; cf. infra, p. 253.

15. Ibid., p. 87.

16. See Roach, Rawlinson MS., D 833, fos 56 vo-57; Roach, The Great Crisis, London, 1725 (1727), p. 99; Thune, op. cit., p. 86. Mrs Bathurst's mystical writings are preserved in Rawlinson MSS., D 1262, 1263.

17. See Theosophical Transactions by the Philadelphian Society, London, 1697, pp. 221-2. The meetings were opened by the reading of a portion of the Scriptures.

18. Pordage, Sophia: das ist / Die Holdseelige ewige Jungfrau der Göttlichen Weisheit, Amsterdam, 1699, pp. 143, 160.

19. See Roach, The Great Crisis, pp. 42-4; Roach, Rawlinson MS., D 833, fos 54 vo-55; cf. Thune, op. cit., pp. 64-5, 91-3.

20. See Roach, The Great Crisis, pp. 9, 97, 105-7; Theosophical Transactions, pp. 155-7, 160, 269 seq. Roach was in correspondence with Poiret, who in 1704 wrote him a letter about Mrs Lead's death (Rawlinson MS., D 832, fo 33).

21. See E. Benz, ‘Verheissung und Erfüllung’, in Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, Stuttgart, 1935, Bd. LIV, pp. 488 seq.

22. J. Lead, The Wonders of God's Creation Manifested, In the Variety of Eight Worlds, London, n.d. (circa 1695), pp. 39 seq.; cf. Pordage, Theologia Mystica, pp. 16 seq.

23. Lead, ibid., pp. 72-4.

24. See A. Koyré, La Philosophie de Jacob Boehme, Paris, 1929. Petersen (Mysterion, T. I, Gespräch III, p. 109) quotes from Boehme a clear affirmation of the eternity of hell.

25. Pordage, Theologia Mystica, pp. 127, 135, 137, 148.

26. Lead, Enochian Walks, p. 18.

27. Ibid., p. 35.

28. Lead, Eine Offenbarung der Bottschafft des Ewigen Evangelii, Amsterdam, 1697, pp. 35-6. I have not been able to find a copy of the English original of this (A Revelation of the Everlasting Gospel-message, London, 1697).

29. In C. Walton, Notes and Materials … William Law, p. 213.

30. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 17-18.

31. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 16-17, cf. p. 27.

32. Ibid., p. 11.

33. White, Restoration, sig. a3 v0-a7.

34. Theosoph. Trans., p. 98.

35. Ibid., pp. 269 seq.

36. Cf. Benz, Ecclesia Spiritualis, pp. 13 seq., 36, 244-9.

37. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 43-5; cf. Lead, The Wonders of God's Creation, pp. 51-3; Lee in Walton, Notes and Materials, pp. 195, 197.

38. Walton, Notes and Materials, p. 193.

39. Ibid., p. 214.

40. Lead, The Enochian Walks, p. 16, cf. pp. 21-2, 37 and Introduction; cf. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 23, 25.

41. Lead, The Wonders, pp. 12-15.

42. Lead, The Enochian Walks, pp. 23-4.

43. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 28-30, cf. pp. 18, 31, 33.

44. Gichtel, Theosophia Practica, 3rd ed., Leyden, 1722, Bd. V, pp. 3649-3650, 3707, 3734.

45. Gichtel, ibid., Bd. I, pp. 229-30, 326, Bd. V, pp. 3121-4, Bd. VI, p. 1463.

46. Ibid., Bd. I, pp. 223, 228, Bd. II, p. 1270.

47. Gichtel, Theosoph. Pr., Bd. III, pp. 2437-8, 2446.

48. Ibid., Bd. III, pp. 2403, 2412.

49. On the origins of Boehme's Wisdom, see A. Koyré, La Phil. de J. Boehme, p. 213.

50. Lead, The Wonders, p. 8.

51. Lead, Eine Offenbarung, pp. 18-19; cf. Lead, A Living Funeral Testimony, London, 1702, pp. 20-2.