In 1692 George Keith was expelled from the Quakers in Philadelphia, and by 1702 he had converted to Anglican Christianity. Historians have attributed Keith's expulsion to the politics of Pennsylvania. Madeleine Ward demonstrates that the dispute was theological: Keith wished to show the importance of belief in the incarnate Christ to Quakers, whereas his detractors stressed the sufficiency of the light within. Quaker scholars have been reluctant to see Keith as a full Quaker because of these beliefs but, Ward argues, Keith was in the Quaker mainstream, and the division between Quakerism and Christianity was a consequence of the 1692 schism. There was, Ward demonstrates, no inevitability to the breach: Keith was not alone among Quakers who saw themselves as recovering the true meaning of primitive Christianity. Ward cites a recent survey which demonstrated that 37 per cent of Quakers do not identify as Christian, and this book might be read as an argument for the recovery of a Christian Quakerism in a Keithian mould. The Christian Quaker advances this case by tracing the development of Keith's ideas through his career in Scotland, England and America. Keith's return to England as an Anglican clergyman nicely frames the volume. Ward situates her work within the theological turn in Quaker studies over the last few years, and she is at her best when discussing the intricacies of theological argument. She traces Keith's interest in Christology from the 1670s, when he began defending Quakerism as the best reflection of primitive Christian practice. Keith's desire to reconcile Quaker principles with the Incarnation led him to appropriate the Kabbatistic notion of Adam Kadmon. He developed these ideas through his correspondence with the Cambridge Platonist, Henry More. On Ward's account, Keith's attempts to reconcile Quakerism and Christianity only became problematic for his fellow Quakers in the 1690s when his emphasis on the body of Christ led him to downplay the role of the light within. Ward's book could have been improved by examining his engagement with Christian mysticism. As she notes, Keith first became interested in these ideas in Aberdeen. She points out that Keith taught mathematics to Gilbert Burnet and points to several similarities between Keith and the circle of Burnet and his mentor, Robert Leighton, and examines the Aberdeen debates over immediate inspiration in 1675. But Ward's discussion of Keith's Scottish context is limited. She appears unaware of Gordon DesBrisay's work on Quakerism in Aberdeen. Reference could also have been made to Keith's other Aberdeen contemporaries, Henry Scougal and George and James Garden, all of whom defended similar ideas about divine inspiration: why did he turn Quaker, while they remained Episcopalians? Nevertheless, The Christian Quaker is an important and timely addition to the literature on both early Quakerism and early modern historical theology, which adds much to an emerging literature on Quaker theology. Ward ably fulfills her objective of showing that, in the seventeenth century, there was no contradiction between being a Christian and being a Quaker.