aammm v JhTl Hi {3 / 2„ OF THE AT PRINCETON, N. J. X> O ^T _A- T* I C* ^- OS" SAMUEL AGNEW, OF PHILADELPHIA. PA. G46 '^tXAscX %J-rZ . /^^T j ?3^ Case, Division ... . book, r?lfi& f OF THE GENERAL AND PARTICULAR CAUSES WHICH HAVE PRODUCED THE LATE DISORDERS AND DIVISION'S IN THE YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS, HELD IN PHILADELPHIA: WITH INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ON THE STATE OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCHES, their gradual declension, and subsequent advancement in reformation, to the rise of the SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. BY JAMES COCKBURN. PHILADELPHIA: PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR, BY PHILIP PRICE, JR., AND SOLD BY JOHN TOWNSEND, NO. 346 MARKET STREET. 1829, EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA,™ witj ******* BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the Fifth day | L. S.g of February, in the fifty third year of the Indepen- ******* deoce of the United States of America, A. D. 1829, James Cockburn, of the said District, hath deposited in this Office the Title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as Au- thor, in the words following', to wit: " A Review of the General and Particular causes which have produced the late Disorders and Divisions in the Yearly Meet- ing of Friends, held in Philadelphia, with Introductory Remarks on the State of the Primitive Churches, their gradual Declen- sion, and subsequen-t Advancement in Reformation, to the rise of the society of Friends, By James Cockburn." In conformity to the Act of Congress of the United States, intitled, "An Act for the encouragement of learning, by secur- ing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned." And also to the Act, entitled, " An Act supplementary to an Act, entitled ' An Act for the encouragement of learning, by £eci ring the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein men- tioned,' and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of design- ing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints." D. CALDWELL, Clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. PREFACE. The late disorders that have taken place within the limits of the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia, deeply affected the writer of this Review. In early life he was con- vinced of the fundamental principle professed by Friends, pre- vious to much knowledge respecting the practical testimonies of the society. Being born in Scotland he was educated in the doctrines of the established church of that country. Arriv- ing in Philadelphia in the Spring of 1801 , his former impressions had prepared him readily to unite with the practical habits of Friends, and to join in christian communion with them. For twenty-five years he has taken a feeling interest in the affairs o' the society, and could not remain indifferent to the progress of those measures and proceedings, the development of which has produced so much painful exercise and trial to Friends of this Yearly Meeting. Had the unpleasant occurrences which have taken place, remained as a private or partial misunderstanding in the form of a domestic difference, it would have been improper and un- necessary, to present the circumstances to public attention. The orthodox brethren, however, have dismissed all delicacy on this subject by a public "Declaration,"* in which they assign as the cause of their disunion from the principal part of * Declaration, &c. adopted by the orthodox Yearly MeetiDg in Fourth month, 1828. IV this Yearly Meeting, " an open denial of the fundamental doc- trines of the christian religion, as they are laid down by our blessed Redeemer and his apostles, in the Holy Scriptures." Having made this grievous charge, they further declare, " we cannot unite with them in church fellowship, nor own them to be of our communion." The writer is aware that a charge does not constitute either fact or guilt in relation to the accused ; but as the orthodox De- claration embracing the charge quoted, appears to be of an imposing and deceptive character, and as great pains have been taken to introduce it to the particular attention of other religious professors, with a design to produce an impression thafcthe greater part of the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia have changed their religious views, it seems due to truth, and to the christian community, as well as to the society of Friends, to exhibit a correct outline of transactions as they took place. In feeling the weight of religious obligation to exhibit a review of those occurrences which fell under the particular notice of the writer, (and to such the work is principally confin- ed,) his mind was drawn into tender sympathy with innocent and upright Friends who have been imposed upon by specious representations, and constructed charges, destitute of solid foundation, tending to retain them in bondage to that mistrust and indecision of mind which greatly interrupts their usefulness and comfort. Although the writer could not sacrifice truth to the respect which he wishes to cherish towards the orthodox brethren, he has endeavoured to avoid personal reflection, and has not men- tioned even all the names of those which have already been made public in connexion with their agency in particular cases. The object has not been to criminate and censure individuals but to exhibit the general causes of declension in the society of Friends, and to Bhow that the particular cause* of the late dia- orders, hare been produced by the same thirst of power which acting on the mind of man, has proved in every age a source of disorder both in religious and civil society. Animated with a fervent desire to rest on the basis of correct principles, and ap- preciate the agency of christian virtue, the writer turned his attention from immediate exciting causes, and looked back to the origin and progress, the declension and partial reformations of the christian churches. He viewed with renewed interest the rise and increase of the society of Friends, and in discerning the efficacy of their peculiar principle, and the usefulness of its practical influence, he was not insensible to the manifesta- tion and progress of those general causes of declension in this society which have appeared in all others whose history has been developed, and which, when not timely counteracted, have uniformly produced the same results. As the " tree is known by its fruit," so every class of actions bears evidence of the spirit which produceth them. The dis- interested reader of this Review will discriminate, according to his own judgment, and the nature of the evidence connected with the record of circumstantial facts. It is hoped the class of Friends called orthodox, in reviewing an outline of their proceedings will closely examine the spring of their actions, as well as the temper and disposition which have carried them into effect, and cease to increase the injury they have inflicted on the society by traducing and oppressing their brethen. It is moreover earnestly recommended to Friends, who may have been tried and afflicted by the desolations which a selfish spirit has brought upon the society, to recur to the sacred enclosure, limited and defended by truth, where the weary rest at noon, ^nd where the spring of divine consolation and christian support will be experienced, uniting in an increasing qualification to sustain the testimonies of practical righteousness. The term orthodox, as applied in this work to that class of Friends whose recent proceedings have caused so much difii- VI eulty in the society on this continent, is used only to distin guish the parity, and in no respect as a concession that the indi- viduals composing it are more correct in their principles or practice, than the great majority of Friends whom they have charged as being unsound, and attempted to disown. This attempt, however, has only resulted in their own exclusion from the body, as Friends continue in the exercise of the customary relations of the society, and in the maintenance of those principles which they have always professed as a people. The application of the term orthodox to a party in the society of Friends, appears to have arisen from the similarity of their assumptions and measures with those of the various sects who, at different periods of the church, have laid claim to this dis- tinction, and on this ground have proscribed and persecuted others who hare differed from them in opinion. It is proper to state that the author alone is answerable for the sentiments and views exhibited in the progress of this re- view. They are the fruits of a feeling conviction made in his own mind, and are submitted to public attention, as a tribute to the support of those principles of civil and religious liberty which have influenced him through life, and which he hopes to cherish to its close. Philadelphia, 2d Mo. 6th, 1829. ■ tii CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Page. Explication of Practical Christian Principles. . . 1 CHAPTER I. State of the Primitive Churches, and their Declension from Original Purity into Ecclesiastical Establishments. 5 CHAPTER II. Origin of the Orthodox Creed, and gradual advancement of the Protestant Reformation. . . . . .13 CHAPTER III. Rise of the society of Friends, their peculiar principles leading unto peculiar Testimonies. . . . .21 CHAPTER IV. The Christian Discipline of Friends gradually established, and the usefulness of the Society exhibited. . .31 CHAPTER V. Review of the general causes of Declension in the society of Friends, the Settlement of the society in Pennsylvania, and subsequent Declension. . . . . .39 CHAPTER VI. Causes of the late disorders in the society of Friends, within the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia. . 53 CHAPTER VII. Origin and duties of Elders in the society of Friends- Orthodox party formed, and endeavour to introduce a Creed into the society. ...... 81 CHAPTER VIII, Orthodox party pursuing measures to separate themselves from the society of Friends — Uncommon occurrences in the Western Meeting. . . . . . .91 YUl CHAPTER IX. Page- Causes of Division in Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting'. . 109 CHAPTER X. Review of disciplinary principle of Friends, with remarks on the alleged laying down of Green street Monthly Meeting by Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting. . .133 CHAPTER XL Inconsistent proceedings in the Meeting for Sufferings. . 169 CHAPTER XII. Dividing causes in the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia, in the Fourth month, 1827. . . .187 CHAPTER XIII. Occurrences in connexion with the general meeting of Friends held by adjournments, at Green street Meeting- house, in the city of Philadelphia, on the Fourth and Fifth days of the Sixth month, 1827, pursuant to an adjournment on the 21st of Fourth month previous. . 206 CHAPTER XIV. Extra session of the Yearly Meeting of Friends, held in Philadelphia, in the 10th month, 1827, according to the recommendation of the General Conference held on the the 4th and 5th of the Sixth month. . . . .222 CHAPTER XV. Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia in the 4th month, 1828. . . . . . . . .228 CHAPTER XVI. Cases resulting from the re-organization of the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia. . . . 250 CHAPTER XVII. Conclusion — Embracing a Condensed Summary of the whoie 271 INTRODUCTION. EXPLICATION OF PRACTICAL CHRISTIAN PRIN- CIPLES. The great and leading object of the Gospel or New Testament dispensation, is to preserve man in or restore him to that state, in which he was created, and in which the energies of his being may be brought into proper action, and approxi- mate to the complete development of that capa- city wherein true and lasting good is enjoyed. Hence, spiritual regeneration of heart was uni- formly inculcated, and particularly insisted upon by Jesus Christ; and all who have experienced restoration from the dominion of selfish nature, and have been brought into the enjoyment of goodness and truth, have borne testimony to the redeeming power of the spirit of Christ. • Noth- ing short of the power and virtue of the Divine spirit, can change the heart of man, fallen under the influence and direction of the sensual nature. As is the fountain, so will be the stream. If the intellectual powers of the human mind be 1 effectually drawn under the controul of the sen- sual nature, the desires, pursuits, and actions will be of the same kind. But if the mind yields to the reception and operation of redeeming power and virtue, the gospel spirit will produce gospel fruits. The pure morality of the gospel spirit, which is so congenial with the best interests and highest enjoyment of humanity, flows as the native stream from regeneration of heart, or the restora- tion of the human mind under the practical in- fluence and direction of the Divine spirit. Doing to others as we would they should do unto us, is the golden rule of Christian morality. This rule is deeply grounded in the nature of things, forever resting on the principle of immu- table justice. But its foundation is not more permanent, than the superstructure in effect is beautiful and beneficial. Had this rule uniformly governed men in their actions one to another, how much crime and unhappiness might have been prevented in every age of the world! How greatly might the means of comfort and enjoy- ment have been diffused throughout every class of menuin their different allotments in life. In addition to the principle of operative jus- tice, or pure practical morality, the New Testa- ment law-giver, enjoined and exemplified a full display of that righteousness which is congenial with the proper development of the human cha- racter, unfolding itself under those benign influ- ences which flow from the fountain of truth, He distinctly enjoined the extension of love to ene- mies, and good will to those who might hate or persecute us; or in other words, showed the pos- sibility of the human mind being so intimately united with the fountain of goodness and truth, as not to be moved from it by any external occur- rence; but through all trials, bringing forth the native fruits of the Divine Spirit — peace, love, and good will to all men, however they might deviate from truth and justice. This injunction was fulfilled by many of the followers of Jesus Christ, both in primitive and succeeding times; who for a good conscience, and the testimony of Jesus, valued not their natural lives, but passive- ly submitted to the cruelty of their persecutors. CHAPTER I. STATE OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCHES AND THEIR DECLENSION FROM ORIGINAL PURITY, INTO ECCLESIASTICAL ESTABLISHMENTS. The persecutions raised against Jesus Christ and his immediate followers, became the visible means of distributing the first promulgators of the outward manifestation of Christ among the sur- rounding nations. Their labours of love being accompanied with the practical evidences of the Divine spirit, nu- merous churches became established in the sim- plicity and purity of truth — ardent love to God, and feeling sympathetic affection to one anoth- er, purified by the spirit of true devotion, became the basis and bond of the primitive church's union. They practically experienced the fulfil- ment of the declaration of Jesus Christ: " By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." While the primitive churches abode in the enjoyment of their first love, there does not appear to have been any ne- cessity for outward written confessions of belief or faith. It does not appear that Jesus Christ laid upon his followers any outward formula of external doctrines for their guidance or observ- ance; but distinctly assured them, that the spirit of truth in their own minds would lead them into all truth necessary for them. — In conformity with this assurance, the apostles, when met to de- liberate concerning the Gentile believers,* de- clared it seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and them, to lay no other burthen upon their Gentile brethren, than to abstain from those immoralities and idolatrous customs, which were inconsistent with the purity of Christian worship and practice. Neither Christ nor the Apostles thought it expe- dient to condense into a written form, any system- atic theory of the gospel, nor to prescribe any absolute form of church government. What is called the Apostles' Creed, is alleged by eccle- siastical historiansf not to have been written for some centuries after the Apostolic age; and that there is reason to believe it was not written all at once, but according to the springing up in the church, from time to time, of what was supposed to be heresy. The fact is, the church being composed of many members, a gradual unfolding * Acts xv. 29 f Mosheim, vol. i. p. 33 & 54 of truth was to be experienced in the minds of the faithful, opening their views to the adoption and application of such measures, as their wants and exigencies might require. This was evidently the testimony of Jesus, when he declared that they that did the will of his Father in heaven, should know of the doctrine, whether it was true, by the practical operation of Truth enlightening their minds. And again, he testified to his follow- ers, "I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now." From these testimonies, as well as from the practice of the apostles and primitive church, we may perceive, that both individual members and the collective church, were to be under the in- fluence, direction, and government of the spirit of Christ. And for the encouragement of dedicat- ed faithfulness, it was promised, " where two or three are met together in my name, there will I be in the midst of them." And again, u Lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Hence, the members of the true church in every age, were to turn their principal attention, and place their chief dependence upon the open- ings, leading, and guidance of the spirit of Christ, both in their private walking, and in their relations with one another, in maintaining that order and consistency, into which the truth ever will lead its followers. Entire uniformity in every idea and opinion, does not appear essential to the advancement-of different individuals, in the saving knowledge and experimental benefits of the truth. Neither does entire uniformity in church government, seem essential for the right ordering of different religious communities or churches, if the operation of best wisdom be rightly applied to their respective situations and circumstances. The order and proceedings of the primitive churches, were such as the spirit of truth led its followers into. They were at first single congregations* of Christians, united in the feeling of Christian love and mutual enjoyment, instructing and strengthening one another in the path of virtue and piety. Whatever arrange- ment their particular situations might require, in instructing the ignorant, visiting the sick, and supplying the necessities of the poor, the mem- bers of each community were upon the most per- fect equality, each administering the necessary care to its own concerns. Thus practically re- alizing the declaration, " One is your Master even Christ, and all ye are brethren.' 7 Until the middle of the second century, the practical illustration of Christian principle and * Mosheim, p. 45, vol. i. piety remained in effective operation, when the Grecian churches* in conformity with their po- litical customs, began to associate or form all the congregations of a province, into one ecclesiasti- astical body — other provinces imitated the ex- ample of forming councils or synods, thus break- ing up the beautiful equality into which the gospel had led, and eventually laying a founda- tion for raising the whole structure of ecclesias- tical distinction and domination, which has prov- ed so injurious to the cause of Christ, and the general interests of mankind . These councils or synods, although composed of Ministers or Bishops as representatives from the several congregations or churches, by de- grees assumed exclusive power, until they be- came independent of the people; turning their influence into dominion, and their counsel into laws, and in process of time, they openly asserted that Christ had empowered them to prescribe to his people, authoratative rules of faith and man- ners, as well as to demand of right an exclusive maintainance.f Such practical deviations from the simplicity and purity of the gospel, could not fail to alienate * Mosheim, page 87, vol. i. f Mosheim, page 88, vol. i. 2 10 the minds of Christian professors, from the spring of true piety and virtue, and open a door to those errors and schisms, which spread over the Chris- tian churches.- — As the Bishops and other bene- ficiaries of the church rose to independence, and obtained the means of worldly aggrandizement, they imbibed the wisdom and policy of the world, and became involved in those pursuits which led to preferment and individual promotion. The Bishops having raised themselves as a distinct order above the people, soon violated the equality of one another, and claimed those degrees of precedency which are conformable to the de- sires of worldly ambition. New orders of infe- rior clergy were introduced by degrees into the service of the church, and many customs inter- mixed with the forms of religious worship, which greatly tended to strengthen the hands of those engaged in making a gain or merchandize of the concerns of religious society. The Bishops in many places assumed a princely splendour and authority, where ever they could obtain the means from the churches under their care. The example of the Bishops was ambitiously imitated by the inferior orders of clergy, who appear to have much neglected the duties of the stations they laid claim to, and abandoned themselves to 11 the indolence and delicacy of an effeminate and luxurious life.* Thus the simplicity and pu- rity of the Christian church was by degrees de- parted from, and an establishment of Political Christianity gradually raised by human policy and power, which for ages darkened with its shade the rising emotions of virtue in the human mind. * Moaheira, page 136, vol. i. % 13 CHAPTER II. ORIGIN OF THE ORTHODOX CREED, AND GRADUAL ADVANCEMENT OF THE PROTESTANT REFOR- MATION. In the progress of individual aggrandizement and conflicting interests for the attainment of power, the rulers of the church became involved in contentions and divisions respecting opinions and doctrines, which greatly disturbed the public repose, while their only object was to promote pri- vate interest, by the establishment of particular dogmas. — To allay these feuds and contentions, and perhaps, with political views, to consolidate his own power through the agency of the church, Constantine the Roman Emperor convened a gen- eral Council of Bishops at Nice, in the year 325* whose deliberations on the existing controver- sies in the church, resulted in the formation of what has been called the Nicean or Athanasian Creed. This Creed which sprung from conten- tion, appearing to be gratifying to the greater * Mosheim, p. 217, vol. i, 14 number of church rulers and who of consequence had the most influence and power over the peo- ple, was sanctioned by the Emperor, and enforc- ed by law; but was afterwards annulled, and op- posite views countenanced and supported, both by Constantine and his successors. Both the supporters and opposers of this creed, appear to have acted on the principle of coercion, enforc- ing by pains and penalties their prevailing views. After much contention and persecution on both sides, this famous creed received the finishing touch, by a second council of one hundred and fifty Bishops, met in Constantinople under the auspices of the Emperor Theodosius, in the year 381* — which was thenceforward taken and deemed to be orthodox — whatever may be the proper meaning of the term orthodoxy, in the case before us, it plainly exhibits a system of religious opinions, supported and imposed on others by power. The practical operation of the spirit of orthodoxy, has afforded unequivocal proofs of the correctness of this definition. It seems hardly possible to estimate the quantity of human comfort and human life, that this spirit of orthodoxy has destroyed in the world, through the ages that are past. The humane mind sickens at a review of the bloody spectacle produced by * Mosheim, p. 224, vol. i. 15 the most cruel malignity of which the heart of man is capable, under the guise of religious zeal. Whatever may be the merits or pretensions of this orthodox creed, we are sure it has no neces- sary connexion with the gospel of Christ, which breathes (i peace on earth and goodwill to men," leaving all, as it respects private judgment, in the enjoyment of their own feelings, answerable to Him only who sees in " secret, and who will reward openly." The formation of any creed, abstractedly considered, may be harmless; but its substitution in the place of the gospel, or its imposition on others who have the same Unaliena- ble right to judge for themselves, as those who made it, appears to be impious and unjust. — Im- pious, in setting up an image of human concep- tion, to limit the unfoldings of the Divine spirit; unjust, in violating every obligation, arising from the equality of our common nature. The exhi- bition Of a creed as a popular centre of voluntary union in particular societies, may be admissible, on the ground of human policy; but it has no countenance or foundation in the gospel, which consists torted and magnified into sufficient importance to procure their disownment. The exclusion of Friends ; by the orthodox party, from places of trust, was a preliminary step to the disfranchisement of so many of them as might be necessary to intimidate and over- awe the rest, and upon the ruins of the rights and reputation of their fellow-members, more firmly to found their own darling power and domina- tion. But the result has not answered expectation: schemes of selfish policy have sunk beneath their own weight. Truth endureth forever. It would be. unpleasant to advert to all the party measures pursued by those called orthodox in the city meetings, to crush their fellow-mem- bers, and more fully establish their own power. A few instances of uncommon procedure in the Western meeting will be noticed. In the 1st mo. 1825, the elders introduced into the Prepa- rative Meeting of Ministers and Elders a charge of unsoundness against Elias Hicks, with a view to obtain the sanction of that meeting to intro- duce the case into the Monthly Meeting. On deliberate consideration it was thought a case not belonging to that Meeting. No case, in fact, had been made out. It was only the construction of individuals, who might have a right to their own 94 views, but could not consistently attempt any legal process against a member of another Yearly Meeting in his absence. It was earnestly re- commended, to dwell in patience in relation to the subject, and cherish moderation and charity towards one another, and faith and confidence in the Head of the church, who would in due time find ways and means to correct wrong things. This view of the subject appeared to be con- curred with, yet one of the elders introduced the subject to the next Monthly Meeting, on his own responsibility, without any regard to the conclu- sion or unity of the Preparative Meeting of Min- isters and Elders. It may be asked if this was consistent in itself, or if ! it accorded with the known practice of society? It was setting at nought the judgment and conclusion of the Pre- parative Meeting of ministers and elders. It was moving in disunity in a new case, not pro- perly cognizable by either of the meetings. Every step was marked with disorder, division, and desolation of every good feeling. The Monthly Meeting being unexpectedly called to the consideration of the subject, and the case being new, under the plausible pretence of in- quiry, a committee was appointed to investigate its merits. The result was, the greater propor- tion of the committee sustained the allegations of 95 the elders, three of whom being members of the committee, were thus virtually made judges in their own cause. The report was improperly entered upon the minutes in the way of informa- tion, but it was not acceptable to the meeting. Strenuous efforts were made to direct a copy of the report to Jericho Monthly Meeting: but the clerk at that time had too much integrity to pro- ceed any further in the case, against the judg- ment of so many active members. While the re- port was under consideration an occurrence took place, which clearly exhibited the temper of the promoters of this measure. Israel Yarnall who had formerly been a member of the Western, and then belonged to the Northern District Monthly Meeting, being in attendance felt free- dom to express his opinion respecting the subject of the report, in the following words: " If it be understood by the report, — rifit set forth and declare, that Elias Hicks, the last time he was in this house, preached doctrines contrary to the Holy Scriptures, and contrary to our first or primitive Friends, being present at that time, I stand here as a witness that it is utterly false." This declaration acted like an electrical shock on the minds of the elders and a few others, se- veral rising simultaneously to put him down. Their excitement produced not only unbecoming 96 disorder in the meeting, but induced two of the elders to make complaint to the overseers of the North meeting against Israel, for the liberty he had taken of expressing his opinion: and they en- tering into the views of the elders procured his disownment by the orthodox party in that Month- ly Meeting; but Israel appealing to the Quarter- ly Meeting was reinstated without a dissenting voice. This was certainly an uncommon case. From the first rise of the society, a free intercourse in the exercise of Christian fellowship had always obtained. Strangers have uniformly been encour- aged to express their feelings and sentiments in meetings for business; agreeably to the Book of Advices, page 39: " In order to unite us more nearly one to another as members of the same body, and to strengthen each other's hands in pro- moting the cause of truth, it is recommended that Friends stand open to the leadings Of the love of God through Jesus Christ our Lord; and when in that, they feel their minds drawn to sit with any of their neighbouring Monthly or Quarterly Meet-; ings, that they attend thereto, and that such meetings as are so visited, receive such in the same love, and not look upon them as intruders: thus mutual help will be given and received amongst us." It may be asked, wherein was the 97 offence in the present case? Here was a Friend? who had lately been a member of the Western meeting, well known to be practically consistent with the principles of the society, simply giving his views in a calm and deliberate manner, on an essay of a report submitted to the deliberation of the meeting, and which contained the views of only a few individuals couched in ambiguous lan- guage, implying a general charge against Elias Hicks without specification or proof; which re- port the meeting at that time was not prepared to adopt. The reporters say: "We apprehend Elias Hicks expressed sentiments inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures, and the religious principles that our society has held from its first rise;" but do not state what those sentiments were, nor advance any evidence to sustain their apprehensions* Well light the friend qualify this declaration with the ^nark. u If the report intended to say," &c that he as a witness could give his testimony to the contrary. But suppose an offence had been com- mitted by the Friend's expression, it must have been against the Monthly Meeting. The meet- ing did not censure the Friend. It took no cogni- zance, nor gave any direction in the case. He was in the exercise of an accustomed privilege, un- der the protection of the meeting. Whence was it then, that any two or three members could take 13 98 all the power of the Monthly Meeting into their own hands, and pursue this Friend to disown- ment? It was undoubtedly on the principle of exclusive power, or that of a few orthodox mem- bers considering themselves "the meeting." The tender and feeling mind perceived that this trans- action was a precursor to the prostration of the independence of the Western meeting. Had these occurrences been only the effect of immediate excitement, compassion for the weak- nesses and infirmities of humanity would plead an excuse: but when we see, year after year, the causes of disorder reduced to a system of action, the actors must in the view of all rea- sonable men be responsible for the consequence. On the 10th of 1st mo. 1827, a renewed evi- dence was exhibited of the deep rooted prejudice against Elias Hicks remaining in the minds of his Philadelphia accusers. In the course of a religious visit, with the unity and approbation of his meetio,gs at home, according to the order of society, he attended the Western meeting on the afternoon of first-day, which was crowded to overflowing, principally owing to the, objec- tions raised against him by his unceasing oppo- nents, and partly to the public opposition made to him in Pine street meeting in the morning. An impression appears to have been made on 99 the public mind that Elias Hicks was to be put down. The novelty of such an occurrence among a people always remarkable for their peaceable principles and demeanor, could not fail to draw a large concourse to the meeting. Although the meeting was so exceedingly crowded, and form- ed of such a variety of character, it maintained the accustomed appearance of propriety and quiet attention during the silent part, and while Elias was speaking, whose discourse appeared to give general satisfaction. After he sat down, one of the elders, evidently with the design of opposing Elias Hicks, attempted to give his views of what the society believed. This immediately excited a general murmur, overcoming the speak- er's voice, and producing considerable unsettle- ment. Elias rose and with entreaty quieted the minds of the audience, and after a short commu- nication from Willet Hicks the meeting conclu- ded. On fourth-day following in the Western Prepa- rative Meeting, the elder whose communication, as has been stated, disturbed the meeting of first- day afternoon, under considerable excitement de- clared, " that he went to meeting with his life in his hand to bear a testimony for his Saviour," and strongly urged the necessity of inquiring into the cause of the late disorderly meeting, insinuating 100 that it was the effect of design. A committee of inquiry, consisting of this elder and others favourable to his views, was appointed in the Monthly Meeting, who reported, " that a large and disorderly concourse of people were brought together, at an unseasonable hour, and under cir- cumstances that strongly indicated a design to pre-occupy the house to the exclusion of most of the members of our meeting, and to suppress in a riotous manner any attempt that might be made to maintain the doctrines and principles of our religious society, in opposition to the views of Elias Hicks." The committee moreover ex- press a belief, u that the doctrines and sentiments of Elias Hicks greatly tend to the subversion of sound religious principles, and of the wholesome restraints of moral and domestic discipline." From the elder's own declaration, and from the report of the committee it is acknowledged to have been a settled measure to oppose Elias Hicks, under the pretence of " maintaining the doctrines and principles of our religious society." In addition to the above acknowledgments, the facts connected with this subject, that transpi- red in the other meeting manifest a previously settled plan of public opposition to Elias Hicks by those called orthodox. It may be asked what right these individuals had to enter into such an 101 arrangement? Is there any discipline to warrant such an undertaking? The letter as well as the spirit of discipline, expressly forbids such pro- ceedings. It was again secretly conspiring against the order and peace of society. It was a pre- meditated violation both of the principle and practice of the society, in disturbing the public worship, by attempting to introduce party views, wholly inappropriate and unconnected with any thing previously said. It Was introducing the will of man, into what the society always consi- dered to belong to the agency of the spirit. It was certainly the most distinct specimen of Ran- terism that has occurred of latter time. How affecting to every sober mind, to see menformerly esteemed by many as of great moral worth, sacri- ficing their reputation and usefulness at the shrine of inveterate prejudice! But although these individuals were in the fault, they were the first to make complaint, and endeavoured to fix the odium of their own measures on others. We have already seen that their previous doings ex- cited public attention, and they were undoubt- edly the operative cause of bringing such num- bers to see and hear Elias Hicks; and if they at- tempted in their own will to enforce an assumed power, is it any wonder that they should have fallen under the murmurs of a discerning public? 102 With what propriety could the disturbance be attributed to Elias Hicks? How was it possible he could influence the public to follow him? What plan could be effective to bring together so many individuals, to act as they did? The assembly, stimulated by the common propensity of curiosity in the human mind, came to see and to hear for themselves, and they acted as they did, by the excitement of the moment; and if the opposers of Elias Hicks had been awakened to their true situation they might have seen their own doings correcting them, and their backsli- dings reproving them! Not satisfied with attributing the fruits of their own doings to the doctrines and senti- ments of Elias Hicks, the orthodox party in the Western meeting, were now determined to enforce their views, and in the name of the meeting toadopt the report and direct it, (in conjunction with the former report that had been placed on the minute, two years before,) to be forwarded to Jericho Monthly Meeting, as matter of charge against Elias Hicks. These double charges were futile and unavailing in re- gard to their object. They fell harmless at the feet of Elias Hicks — but the violence with which they were sent forth, shook the Western Month- ly Meeting' to its foundation. Those called or- 103 thodox, having now obtained a clerk to suit their own views, did not hesitate to trample upon the judgment of one half of the meeting, to gratify their zeal and strengthen their power in the prosecution of their settled designs. This could not be done, but by entirely abandoning the principles of our religious association. The society always professed to rest on love, as a principle, and on unity or concurrence as a mode of action. Both were dispensed with in this case. A part of the meeting, acting under feelings of opposition against Elias Hicks, forcibly introdu- ced a case wholly irrelevant to, and unconnect- ed with the regular business of the Monthly Meeting. There is no discipline whatever that authorizes the entering of the name of a person, a member of another Yearly Meeting, on the minutes of a Monthly Meeting, or which can in such a case, sanction a judgment against him in his absence. Such a practice would lay waste all order and consistency. It is at variance with every principle of justice and equity. The subject matter preferred against Elias Hicks, accusing him of holding " sentiments in- consistent with the scriptures, and the princi- ples of Friends," was only the apprehension of some individuals, who were as liable to receive wrong impressions as others, and who could not with any propriety or justice enforce their views 104 as a iinal standard. We have already seen that the object of discipline was to regulate the prac- tice of the members, but not to interfere with the subject of faith. In consonance with the quota- tion given from William Penn on this subject, (page ) in his preface to Robert Barclay's works, he says: " We never assumed to ourselves a faith or worship- making power. Our case is plain order, not articles of faith: and the disci- pline, of government, not of worship." The proper province of discipline, then, regards order and practice, and not articles of faith, or judg- ing of its soundness toward God. It may be asked, what rule of discipline Elias Hicks had broken? He came, in the love of the gospel and in the order of society, to visit the churches. What offence did he commit, that his service should have been interrupted? If he opened views that might be new to some, they were only offered in gospel affection, for consi- deration — none were compelled to embrace them. Truth is more powerful than error, why then should any be afraid of free inquiry? Why should it be attempted to limit the convictions of truth, or restrain liberty of conscience? We have seen, that the society purchased this liberty with its blood. How, then, can any now, turn round to their brethren and say, <* Thus far have we gone, 105 and no further may we go. Our apprehensions are a legal standard, by which to try and judge thy opinions." Would not this reverse the rule of doing to others as we would they should do unto us? Would it not cancel the bond of Chris- tian union, and lay a foundation for that spirit of intolerant domination, which would effectually suppress the energies of the society, and hence- forth frustrate its usefulness? But had the charge preferred against Elias Hicks, in the Western Monthly Meeting, been admissible, the decided opposition to its progress stood as an insurmountable barrier to any legal decision on it. The clerk of a meeting is ap- pointed to serve the whole meeting, and not a part only. Where a new case is introduced, and half of the meeting is not prepared to act, it is evidently the duty of the clerk to suspend the case until a concurrent decision can take place. Where no concurrence can be obtained such new ease ought to be dismissed. The exercise of a coercive power, in the administration of the discipline, over the consciences of any part of a meeting, never can be justified on any principle recognised by the society. Whenever it takes place, it must be the effect of party excitement and mere human power. Let us reverse the case, and suppose that the moderate part of the 14 106 Western Monthly Meeting, had proposed and insisted upon making a minute approving of Elias Hicks's service, and in opposition to the judg- ment of their brethren, had actually forwarded a copy of such a minute to Jericho Monthly Meeting. This would not have been a new case. It would have accorded with the common prac- tice of society. What would have been the feel- ings of the other part under these circumstances? Would they not have said it was an assu- med coercive power; that it was, on the part of the cjerk, a violation of every obligation connect- ed with that station; and that the messenger, carrying such a document to Jericho Monthly Meeting, bore in his hand an entire misrepre- sentation? — ie Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth." There was no disposition, on the part of Friends, to take any step in the case. They wished to maintain the accustomea relations of society, without intermedling with subjects not properly concerning them. They were not dis- posed to act on the current of floating opinions. They conceived that no question respecting doc- trines was properly before them. They wished to preserve the peace and harmony of the meet- ing, by dismissing those extraneous questions, which naver could be acted upon in unity, nor 107 tend to the edification of the members. The Monthly Meeting is the executive part of society respecting the conduct or practice of members: but it is not authorized to legislate on matters of faith, to circumscribe liberty of conscience, nor to interfere with private opinions, while the de- portment is consistent with fundamental princi- ples. But sentiments such as these, appeared to be treason in the view of the orthodox party; and for inculcating them, a Friend was denounced as a defender of infidelity. The minds of some of the leaders of this party, seemed indeed to be so heated with a misguided zeal, as to consider every moderate member unsound, and as having no right to be heard, nor was any attention paid to the united judgment of those who dissented from the measure. 1 109 CHAPTER IX. CAUSES OF DIVISION IN PHILADELPHIA QUAR- TERLY MEETING. The city meetings being more or less involved in the operation and effects of dividing causes, Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting could not be expected to escape from their general influence, as its active members were principally from the city meetings. The whole strength of those calling themselves orthodox, was brought to bear on Green street Monthly Meeting through the medium of the Quarterly meeting, although the former meeting had given no just cause for hostility against it? by the infraction of any rule of discipline. The offence of that meeting consisted in having received a visit from Elias Hicks in their fami- lies, in the 12th mo. 1822, and in having endor- sed his certificate, with an expression of unity and satisfaction with his services in that visit. All this was undoubtedly within the limits of the rights of any Monthly Meeting. That worthy 110 Friend came in the order of society, with certi- ficates of the unity of his Monthly and Quarterly Meetings; and no valid objection appearing, he performed the service to general acceptance. It will be recollected that it was at this time that the association of the city elders attempted to interrupt the service of Elias Hicks, but failed to accomplish their purpose. From that period, in their eagerness to regain their power, they appear to have entertained an unquencha- ble jealousy, not only against the professed friends of Elias Hicks, but against all who would not implicitly support their views and measures. They felt that their influence and power were at stake, and appear unhappily to have determined that these must be supported, whatever might be the consequence. It is believed, however, that such an impression, although a natural fruit of their indiscreet rashness, was in a great mea- sure groundless. There was no disposition on the part of the great body of Friends to censure these elders with severity. Had they returned with cordiality to the accustomed relations of society, the whole transaction would have been passed over, and soon forgotten. Bnt the morti- fication of defeat, seemed to awaken every energy to pursue a selfish course, which evidently has placed them in a position very different from that Ill which they anticipated, and which probably was less acceptable to their feelings than any which they had imagined — that of being left to them- selves. When Green street Monthly Meeting was endorsing Elias Hicks ? s minute, some alteration being proposed, an elder of that meeting so far concurred with the minute, as to say that he " thought it would do. ?? Yet after witnessing the unity of the meeting, and thus concurring with it, this elder joined with the others in wri- ting and signing a paper already alluded to, im- peaching the gospel ministry of Elias Hicks. In consequence of this injudicious step, this elder, after some time, was taken under care by the overseers of Green street Monthly Meeting; many of the members of said meeting being un- easy with his having acted in his official capacity in opposition to the expressed sense of his own meeting, of which, as we have seen, he was fully apprized, The object in taking him under the care of the meeting, through the medium of the overseers, was to induce hirn to make such expla- nations or concessions to the meeting, as might satisfy all that he was in unity with it. Being, however, a respectable person, and generally belo- ved, very little explanation would have been neces- sary to satisfy his friends. But perhaps influenced 112 or directed by his coadjutors, lest they also should come under censure, this elder declined the au- thority of the overseers in what he called his official duty as an elder, and, through the medi- um of Green street Preparative Meeting of Mi- nisters and Elders, requested assistance of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, in a case of difficulty. The official duty of elders has been noticed in Chapter VII, and consists in attending to such service as the Monthly Meeting may from time to time point out; and certainly, it could form no part of that service to counteract the expressed sense and judgment of the meeting. The Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and El- ders appointed a committee to give such assist- ance to Green street Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders, as might seem to be neces- sary. Being a member of this committee, the writer of this work had an opportunity of wit* nessing the progress of this transaction, and deeply regretted the injudicious and unconstitu- tional measures pursued. When the committee met with Green street Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders, no specific case of difficul- ty was stated, although it was .apparent that some misunderstanding existed. It appeared to be expected, on the part of the elder taken under 113 the care of the overseers, that his fellow members of the Select Meeting would accuse him before the committee. They however simply stated their submission to the request of assistance, for the relief of the Friend proposing it, without having any thing further to say on the subject. Part of the committee strongly urged the members of the meeting, freely to express what they had against each other, that they might understand the whole case and give assistance accordingly. Another part, however, believed that if the meeting had no specific difficulty before them, the committee ought not to make one, and that all inquisitorial proceedings to create difficulty, were inconsistent with the duties of the committee. At last the elder under care, mentioned that the overseers of Green street Monthly Meeting had visited him for having signed the paper against Elias Hicks, an act which he had done in his official capacity, and which he had believed it his duty to do; and that, as one of the overseers was an elder, he considered the proceeding against him, as an infringement of the rights of the Select Meetings, and seemed to suppose he was not amenable to the overseers for his actions as an elder. With this view several of the committee seemed warmly to unite, and wished the whole case to be brought into such a shape, as to be judged of by the Select 15 114 members. Another part of the committee dis- tinctly stated^ that Select Meetings could not interfere with the business of any meetings for dis- cipline, and that if any Friend in that meeting was under the care of overseers he must satisfy them, and not expect a refuge in the Select Meetings. The larger part of the committee/ however, still urged their views, and from time to time, for more than a year, in vain attempted the accomplish- ment of such measures as might over- awe Green- Street Monthly Meeting, and establish the point that elders were independent of overseers in the exercise cf their official duties. As such evident indications of disunity with the meeting had been persisted in by this elder, Green Street Monthly Meeting, after due consid- eration, judged it expedient to release him from his service in that capacity. But as he was a Friend much esteemed by the members of that meeting, no further censure was passed upon him, nor was any infringement made of his rights as a member. He was simply released from the sta- tion or service of elder. The committee of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders then made a report, which in substance stated, that €i Green Street Monthly Meeting, had in a sum- mary way, taken the business out of their hands." This report was objected to, by part of the corn- 115 mittee, on the ground that no specific case had ever been before them, and because the overseers of Green street Monthly Meeting had the elder under care, previous to the appointment of the committee. But although two of the committee could not concur with the report, it was signed on behalf of the whole, notwithstanding the two dissenting members urged a contrary course; and the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders recorded it, and directed the substance of it to be laid before the general Quarterly Meeting, as a remonstrance against Green street Monthly Meeting. Here, it ought to be distinctly understood, there was a direct violation of discipline on the part of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders. So far from having any power to accuse a Monthly Meeting to" the Quarter, the discipline expressly declares, {i None of the said Meetings of Ministers and Elders are in anywise to inter- fere with the business of any meeting for disci- pline." With this express prohibition before them, the dominant part of the Quarterly Meet- ing of Ministers and Elders, in the plenitude of their power, became instrumental in leading the general Quarterly Meeting into a direct infrac- tion of discipline, by receiving on minute a charge against one of its Monthly Meetings, through an 116 unauthorized medium, relating to a subject ex- clusively within its own jurisdiction and control. Neither the Select nor General Quarterly Meet- ing had any thing to do with the decision of Green street Monthly Meeting in relation to the release of its elders. Select Meetings, as has been shown, took their rise from the private conference of those in the ministry, who at first voluntarily met to encour- age each other in a strict adherence to their re- spective gifts, and in a conversation and practice consistent with a dispensation in the ministry. Afterwards Monthly Meetings were encouraged to nominate two or more judicious, solid Friends to sit with the ministers, under the denomination of elders, &S it was expected they would be ex- emplar^ and might afford suitable care and ad- vice to those young in the ministry. In the for- mation of Select Meetings they had no discipli- nary powers. All the power vested in any of the members of those meetings, as such, arose from their weight of character, and that mutual counsel and pious persuasion which is congenial with Christian love and religious care. Individ- ually the members were subject to the common discipline, and it was never intended they should assume a distinct order, or have any other supe- riority in the society, than what arose from their 117 dedication and faithfulness to fundamental prin- ciple. The regulations, subsequently introduced into Select Meetings, in the form of answering certain queries, were designed to keep alive the primitive concern in regard to the exemplary deportment of the members. Expressly prohi- bited from interfering with disciplinary subjects in relation to the public body, it appears strange that any elder should ever have thought himself independent of the Monthly Meeting to which he belonged, or that any Select Meeting should have attempted to over-awe, control, or arraign any meeting of discipline, or to bring itself for- ward, as a distinct body, to interrupt the order and harmony of society. The remonstrance of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and the memorial of the elder released by Green street Monthly Meeting, unconstitutionally and forcibly brought into the general Quarterly Meeting, by the or- thodox party, through the agency of a clerk submissive to their views, presented a distinct specimen of this extraordinary arrogation. This singular assumption may find a parallel in the time of the declension of the primitive chur- ches, but could not passs unobserved, nor be submitted to, in the nineteenth century. Great exertions were made, by addressing the af- 118 fections on behalf of the venerable Friend, to con* vert his memorial into an appeal case. But it was only a private remonstrance against his Monthly Meeting, without the knowledge or consent of that meeting, and according to disciplinary prac- tice it was not entitled to be heard until it had been previously examined by a committee. It fol- lowed close on the remonstrance from the Select Meeting, and both were placed upon minute, as a pressing call for the appointment of a committee to go down to Green street Monthly Meeting, with the charges which had been preferred against it by the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders. This interference of the Select Meeting with the general Quarter, and with Green street Monthly Meeting, excited unexpected alarm, and the opposition manifested against the mea- sure was so great as to prevent the intended proceeding in the case at that time. The clerk, however, contrary to the expressed judgment of the larger part of the meeting, placed the two remonstrances on minute. At the next Quarter- ly Meeting a transposition of the two minutes appeared to have been effected. The memori- al of the Elder was first called up, although it was second on the minutes, with the expectation, it was supposed, that affection for the venerable and respected Friend, would induce the meeting 119 to recognise his application as an appeal case, and would procure a committee to reinstate him. But this device failed to accomplish the desired purpose, and after referring the two cases, from Quarter to Quarter, unexampled scenes of con- fusion and disorder being the consequence, they were referred to the Yearly Meeting of 1827, for its decision. Such are the painful results of a deviation both from principle and practice, in the transaction of religious concerns. When the Select Quar- terly Meeting extended conciliatory counsel and advice, through its committee, to the select mem- bers of Green street meeting, their functions ceased in relation to the case. Every other step was mere assumption, under the excitement of party feeling, and tended to involve the society in great confusion, disturbing the minds of many goodly Friends, and bringing reproach on the way of truth. The temper and disposition elicited by the col- lission of party views, evidenced a sorrowful de- parture from the spirit and practice of the gospel, and exposed Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, for several years, as a scene of unseemly excitement and unkind altercation. Orthodoxy often assu- med its wonted supercilious haughtiness, pouring forth general charges of infidelity and unsound- 120 ness, and at times denouncing and proscribing individuals, not suffering the meeting to be a protection to private character or individual rights. The progress of time increased that flaming zeal of party feeling, which was destroy- ing the benefits of religious association, and lay- ing waste the rights and liberty of society. In the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, in the eighth month, 1826, a second committee was appointed, specially to advise and assist the Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders of Green street Monthly Meeting. This appointment was grounded on a small abatement made in the answers to the queries, received from said Preparative Meeting, re- specting unity, although as great deficiencies were acknowledged in the answers received from at least one other Preparative Meeting. This committee reported the ministry unsound, on the accusation of one individual, and against the evidence of all the remaining part of the meeting, and contrary to the official answers to the queries, on that subject. This report was adopted by the active rulers in the Quarterly Meeting, and no doubt it was a settled point to displace the ministering Friend referred to in the report, or to disown his minis- try; a disposition to do which was on several 121 occasions manifested in a very unseemly manner. In the face of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders the expressions of this Friend were dis- ingenuously wrested and perverted so as to make them mean entirely different from the intentions of the speaker, and the glosses and construction of his accusers were insisted on, in an overbearing and unreasonable manner, as the identical lan- guage uttered by him. This transaction dissi- pated all religious weight from the Select Meet- ing, and entirely frustrated its intention and be- nefits, and forever burst that bond of uniony which in former days had been a joy and a re- joicing. In the progress of these trying circumstances, Green street Monthly Meeting, having appoint- ed a committee to take into consideration the re- lative standing of the elders belonging to that meeting, in consequence of continued opposition of two women elders, not only to particular mem- bers, but to the Monthly Meeting, and having weightily deliberated on the subject, came to the judgment that the service of those two Friends had ceased as elders of the meeting, and accord- ingly they were released. Those Friends offer- ed to the General Quarterly Meeting, a written communication, stating, in general terms, that they were aggrieved by the proceedings of Green 16 122 street Monthly Meeting: without specifying in what respect they apprehended themselves ag- grieved. A strong effort was made in the Quarterly Meeting, by the orthodox members, to make this an appeal case, although a similar application involving the infraction of good order, had been rejected, and with its collateral remonstrance from the Select Quarter, referred to the Yearly Meeting, as the only way to relieve the Quar- terly Meeting from questions it could never agree upon. Such however, was the strange inconsistency of these members, that they again attempted to renew the same question, which nothing but the condescension of Friends had induced them to submit to the decision of the Yearly Meeting, hoping thereby to regain peace and harmony. Yet before the Yearly Meeting arrived, at which the judgment of the body was to be had, a similar case was brought forward to the Quarterly Meeting, again to produce its na- tural fruits — discord and confusion. The repre- sentatives and other members of Green street Meeting attempted to explain what the alleged grievance was; but this was artfully objected to, on the plea, that as the Quarterly Meeting was not officially informed of the nature and merits of the case, it had no right, as a Quarterly Meet- 123 ing, to know any thing about them. A powerful argument indeed, to obtain a committee of in- quiry into a case, not officially or legally before the meeting, and one over which it was well known the Quarterly Meeting had no jurisdic- tion. Such, however, was the policy of the ortho- dox party and their unbending perseverance on this occasion, that they obtained a committee to inquire into the supposed grievance. This committee without waiting to report to the Quarterly Meeting what the alleged griev- ance was, and to receive renewed instructions in the case, immediately transformed the memorial into an appeal, and requested Green street Month- ly Meeting to furnish the minutes of their pro- ceedings in relation to it. Green street Monthly Meeting very properly declined ^countenancing such an extraordinary assumption on the part of a committee only nominated to inquire into an alleged grievance, and not to take into their control the power of both the Quarterly and Monthly Meeting. This committee, however, reported to the Quarterly Meeting, that the pro- ceedings of Green street Meeting in relation to these two Friends should be annulled, although the case, in this point of view, had never been before the Quarterly Meeting, nor had any power 124 been given to the committee by the Quarter, fur- ther than to inquire into the nature of the alleged grievance. It must be observed, that the proper duties of this committee extended no further than to state to the Quarterly Meeting in what this grievance consisted. What right could they have to decide that it was a grievance, and give judgment accordingly, without knowing whether the Quarterly Meeting would consider the re- lease of those Friends from the station of elders in that light. The individuals who appointed this committee, in the name of the Quarterly Meeting, sanctioned their proceedings, and thereby assumed the principle that committees have a right to exceed the instructions of the meeting appointing them to service, which was equivalent to placing in their hands indefinite power without legal restraint. When objections were made to these proceedings by members from Green street Monthly Meeting, it was declared u they were not to be heard. ?? The judiciary powers of the Quarterly Meet- ing were fast absorbing into the mere dictum of a few orthodox leaders, and few if any transac- tions afterwards, could properly be said to be the acts of the Quarterly Meeting, according to original organization, or in the legitimate ex- ercise of its functions. Instead of concurrent 125 feeling governing in the deliberations of the Quarterly Meeting, an exclusive system of policy was adopted, the few to rule the many. In the 11th mo. 1826, a proposal originated in the women's Quarterly Meeting, to visit the Monthly Meetings, which was brought into the men's meeting and under present circumstances was discouraged, on the ground, that it was believ- ed, that no benefit would be likely to arise from any party measure in the then convulsed state of society. It was not distinctly stated what was the specific object of the intended visitation. It was a voluntary offer of certain iudividuals to go down to the Monthly Meetings under the gene- ral guise of religious concern. If this coneern had been of the pure and proper kind, it would have been under the influence of love in its origin, its means, and its end. Force and con- straint could not have entered into the means of its adoption. This subject was contested seve- ral hours in the men's meeting, and the general voice was so much opposed to the measure, that the clerk emphatically declared he could not proceed in the nomination of a committee of men to join with the women in this measure. A per- son, however, whom he had previously called to the table as an assistant, being less scrupulous, undertook (the clerk being absent for a short time) to take down names, but the opposi- 126 tion was so great that he could not fully accom- plish his purpose, and after some time the meet- ing adjourned till next day. During the inter- val the clerk appears to have been relieved from Ms scruples, as next day he complied without he- sitation with the wishes of the orthodox party. When the committee that was appointed met t« ascertain the object in view, two Friends named on it were treated with great indiffer- ence, and when the committee met to agree on a report those Friends did not receive notification, and at the next Quarterly Meeting their names on the nomination list were supplied by orthodox members. This committee reported attention to their appointment, and expressed their belief that it had taken place in best wisdom. They were continued without any disciplinary object, other than the influence of their counsel and ad- vice, on the general^ ground of brotherly care, The Quarterly Meeting could confer no other power on this committee. There had been no regular case brought before the Quarterly Meet- ing, to bring into action any disciplinary power in relation to any of the Monthly Meetings. There was no specific charge against any Month- ly Meeting. There was no appeal case to call forth the judiciary powers of the Quarterly Meeting. There were no obligatory instructions 127 from the Yearly Meeting compelling th'e atten- tion of the Quarter. The legitimate functions of the Quarterly Meeting being exclusively judiciary, it cannot act with any disciplinary power, but when cases are regularly brought be- fore it, either by a Monthly Meeting or by the Yearly Meeting. It possesses in itself no legis- lative or executive functions. It can only de- cide on cases laid before it, according to the re- gular order prescribed in the discipline. Its decisions are referred, either to a Monthly or Yearly Meeting as the case requires. This com- mittee, therefore, could not, according to disci- pline, have any power but that arising from fel- low feeling or brotherly care in regard to any Monthly Meeting within the limits of the Quar- ter, In the face of these incontestible facts, it is asked, upon what principle either of justice or discipline did this committee report to the Quarterly Meeting in the 5th mo. 1827, that Green street Meeting should be laid down, and its members attached to the Northern District Monthly Meeting? Or how could the Quarterly Meeting consistently, adopt this report so much at varience not only with all its own functions, but also with those of the committee? Such a transaction could not take place on any known 128 principle connected with the administration of discipline in the society. It was merely the doings of orthodoxy, destitute of all sanction or effect as it regards the government of society. The truth is, Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting was at this period virtually extinct. After the progress of several years' disunion, the forcible nomination of the committee against the voice of the greater number of the members maybe consi- dered to have terminated the association as re- garded original principles. The principle of condescension and concurrence was not only openly abandoned, but measures were pursued, by deception and absolute power, which went directly to extinguish the rights of individuals, and the liberty of religious society. Was it not through a union of deception and unrestrained power, under the pretence of religious concern, that this committee was forcibly nominated, that it might in some way lay hold on Green street Monthly Meeting? While professing to spread its mantle of love over the Monthly Meetings, was not the real object of this committee to over- awe, or crush Green street Monthly Meeting? In the 14th or 15 th century this kind of policy is understood to have borne the designation of u pious fraud." This last appointment made up three commit- 129 tees, the powers of which were directed to the proscription of Green street Monthly Meeting* One was appointed in the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders under a constructed charge of unsoundness in the ministry; a second was appointed in the General Quarter to inquire into the grievance of the elders who had been releas- ed, and the third, consisting of the general committee now forcibly appointed, was intend- ed to take a wider -range that the designs form- ed might be more certainly compassed. What was the transgression or delinquency of Green street Meeting, that the Quarterly Meeting should for years have been setting itself in ar- ray against it? The sum total of that meeting's offence, consisted in receiving the religious labours of an approved minister coming in gos- pel order amongst them, and in having subse- quently released one male and two female elders from their station, in consequence of their set- tled disunity with the meeting. What is there in either of those cases incon- sistent with the functions and duties of any Monthly Meeting? They were local concerns, over which the Quarterly Meeting had no con- trol, as they did not come within the limits of its judiciary powers. 17 130 The true ground of all those proceedings, was the offence taken by the illegal association of elders, who could not prevent the visit of Elias Hicks to the families of Green street Meeting, and who considered the subsequent release of some of the elders of that meeting as a general censure on themselves. To sustain their pre- tensions, and justify their claims to the power they had assumed, the hue and cry of unsound- ness was raised, to divert the attention of be- holders, and cover the true cause of their irregular and selfish procedure. Every step taken in a dereliction from principle involved them in deeper difficulty, until their way- ward course placed them in a position, distinct from the unity of the body, in the exercise of its disciplinary functions. Abandoning the exercise of condescending principle, and the consistency and effectiveness of general concur- rence in transacting the affairs of the society, those calling themselves orthodox have become an isolated party, which by its own acts has se- parated itself from the body, and has produced a consequent revolution in regard to the extent, and the object of its power. The members of Green street Meeting having long experienced the hostile temper and disposi- tion of the ruling orthodox party in Philadelphia 131 Quarter, and seeing that no limits of discipline appeared to restrain their resentment and designs against the quiet, the harmony, and the inde- pendence of their meeting; and perceiving that the rights of Green street Meeting were no long- er respected, and that every advantage resulting from their connexion with Philadelphia Quarter was gone, a proposition was made by Samuel Noble in the 2d mo. Quarter, 1827, that a con- ference "might be had by a committee of the Quarterly Meeting and Green street Monthly Meeting, with a view of taking into considera- tion the expediency of Green street Monthly Meeting connecting itself with Abington or some other Quarterly Meeting. This proposal, reason- able as it was, and manifesting the disposition of Green street Friends to avoid extremes, and promote harmony in the society, was treated with great indifference and contempt, by those self- important, individuals who vainly conceived their views and opinions ought to be obligatory on every department of society, and direct its mea- sures to the fulfilment of their desires. Subse- quent events have fully demonstrated the decep- tion which these persons practised on themselves, as well as on others, and may stand as a memento to future aspirants, how in their desire to con- trol the concerns of religious society, they ven- 132 ture to disregard the feelings, and rashly trample on the liberties of their brethren possessing the same rights with themselves. 133 CHAPTER X. REVIEW OF THE DISCIPLINARY PRINCIPLE OP FRIENDS, WITH REMARKS ON THE ALLEGED LAYING DOWN OF GREEN STREET MONTHLY MEETING BY PHILADELPHIA QUARTERLY MEETING. In recurring to the formation of the society of Friends, and the introduction and application of disciplinary rules, we must perceive that the whole structure rests on the principle of love. The whole disciplinary power in the society is the operation of love drawing the minds of the mem- bers into oneness of feeling, and producing gene- ral concurrence of action respecting any sub- ject or case, that may occur in accordance with the rules and regulations found to be promo- tive of consistent order. The divine gift or spiritual principle, is the same in its nature in every mind, and all who are gathered into it will come to have a feeling and sense of what the judgment of truth is, in particular cases. Every mind may not see with equal clearness; but the 134 judgment of truth, being unfolded in its own wisdom and gentleness will be owned by all who have any spiritual sensibility, and will produce a general concurrence. Those individuals who are most centred to the principle of truth may see with more readiness or more clearness than others of their brethren, and become organs of expression in regard to what is best to be done in particular cases: but they do not hereby acquire any separate or superior power over their fellow members in the discharge of a duty which, for the time, only renders them the servants of all. The expression of the feelings and views of a few individuals on a subject in a meeting for business may be sufficient when the views expressed meet with the unity and concurrence of the members silently assenting to them. It is not, however, consistent with the nature of the subject before us, to suppose that the active individuals, or speaking members, have any more power in dis- cipline than silent members. It is not the ex- pression or speech that governs in deciding on any case, but the union and concurrence of the members. Those who are denominated the ac- tive or weighty part of a meeting, are so, not from any inherent or distinct superiority in themselves, but because through dedication and faithfulness they become instrumental in opening 135 the current of unity, which spreading over a meeting gives a sanction and decision to cases under consideration. Cases are decided by the weight of concurrence arising from a conviction of the justness and correctness of the views ex- hibited by active members; which reaching the principle of truth in the minds of their fellow- members produce a general feeling of union in the one principle of love. The weight of the active part, then, will be in proportion to the concurrence and unity of the body. Active members standing separate from the unity of the body cannot have either religious weight, or usefulness. It would be evidently inconsistent for active members to ar- rogate to their views, that weight which alone consists in the unity of the body arising from the operation of religious principle. In a private capacity, every one has a right to his own views; but as members of disciplinary meetings, the views exhibited are the property of the meeting; and that view only which obtains general concur- rence has weight to give decision. All religious weight virtually resides in the principle of truth, and can only be partaken of by individuals, and diffused over meetings, by attention and faithful- ness to the operation of this principle. From this view it is difficult to conceive how any indi- viduals can claim an exclusive right to religious 136 weight, and predicate, on their own opinions, a paramount power in discipline. The mere as- sumption is at variance with every grace of the spirit of truth, as well as every principle and obligation binding together religious society. In- dividuals who become so tenacious of their own views, as to enforce their adoption without the consent, concurrence, and unity of the body, at once cancel the bond of religious union, depart from the foundation principle of love and conde- scension, and attempt to supersede the govern- ment of religious principle by human power. These views are not the suggestions of a reck- less libertinism reaching forth to novelty and change, but are self-evident in the very nature of the subject, and entirely accord with the con- current testimony and practice of Friends. In the book of advices put forth by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in the year 1808, to w T hich we have already referred, it is distinctly stated, " It is no man's learning, nor artificial acquirements; it is no man's riches, nor greatness in this world; it is no man's eloquence and natural wisdom, that makes him fit for government in the church of Christ; all his endowments must be seasoned with the heavenly salt, and his gift pass through the fire of God's altar, a sacrifice to his praise and honour, that so self being baptized into death the 137 gift may be used in the power of the resurrection of the life of Jesus' in him. ii Our ancient Friends and their faithful suc- cessors to the present day, have earnestly labour- ed to turn the attention of all to this pure spirit; knowing from experience that it is the means appointed by God for effecting our salvation, and the only foundation of all true religion and wor- ship. As by this we have been led into divers testimonies which have distinguished us from most other professors of the Christian name, we fervently desire that all our members may walk by the same rule and mind the same thing; thus every one filling his place in the body we shall grow up into Him in all things who is the head, even Christ." From every view we can take on this subject, disciplinary power rests not in individuals, but in the body concurrently acting in love and con- descension to promote the general interests of religious society. The term power, on this sub- ject, does not embrace any coercion, but the constraints of love. It is the principle of love ministering to general good, seeking to restrain, by tender persuasion, offending members, and to restore them into the feeling of love, and the unity of the body; and where this labour proves ineffectual to restore, the same love constrains to 18 138 bear testimony against that which is evil, induc- ing, at the same time, a care to leave unreturning offenders under a conviction of that love which through the body seeks their restoration. Where the body thus travails in love to fulfil the law of Christ, it is believed there are few offenders but will own the purity of truth's testimony, and be satisfied that their own doings have separated them from church fellowship. The disciplinary principle is one in its nature, although it is brought to act on different objects, or in different modifications in the several meet- ings. Preparative Meetings receive reports from the overseers, and pi^epare such business as is necessary to lay before the Monthly Meetings, which are denominated such, because of their being held every month at a stated time, and con- sist mostly of the members within a given district. This meeting being open to all the members be- longing to it, and all being on equality respect- ing rights and privileges, it seems to form a com- munity within itself, and, so far as respects the practice of the members, possesses within itself efficient or executive functions to administer care agreeably to the regulations of the discipline. With the exception of disinterested referees in cases of appeal, and the reception of counsel and advice in cases of a difficult nature, Monthly 139 Meetings seem as if they might answer all the purposes of a religious community, in regard to the management of their local concerns. To promote the general interest and welfare of the society at large, it has, been deemed ad- visable to institute Quarterly Meetings, compos- ed of two or more Monthly Meetings, and of a number of Quarters to form a Yearly Meeting. The object of this arrangement is to produce ad- ditional advantages to Monthly Meetings without diminishing any of their rights and privileges. Quarterly Meetings have no powers but what are specifically described. They have a judi- ciary power in cases of appeal which come before the meeting, in a manner distinctly specified. They afford advice to Monthly Meetings, that ask it, in a certain form, respect- ing any difficulty arising from a difference of views on any particular subject; and they stand as a medium of communication between the Monthly and Yearly Meetings in regard to an- swering the queries, and forwarding any new proposal from the Monthly Meetings, or any new decision from the Yearly Meeting to them. The powers of the Quarter are of a conventional nature, for specific purposes agreed on by the Monthly Meetings, entering into the union or relation of a Quarterly Meeting, for mutual ad- 140 vantages. Monthly Meetings, in entering into this relation or agreement to hold a Quarterly Meeting, do not compromit any of their func- tions, far less their existence as separate and in- dependent meetings, but they unite for mutual advantage, according to the nature and use of those meetings. A. B. and C. are three distinct independent Monthly Meetings, and agree, with the consent of a Yearly Meeting, to form, as one of its con- stituent branches, a Quarterly Meeting, for the common advantage of the Monthly Meetings which compose it. They were severally, inde- pendent Monthly Meetings, previous to their union, they remain independent during the union, and will continue so although their con- nexion as a Quarter should be dissolved, and they severally left to seek the advantages of a Quarterly Meeting in an association with some other meetings. No two of these Monthly Meetings, can by any principle in their asso- ciation, arbitrarily dissolve or annihilate the third. If A. and B. are dissatisfied with the procedure of C, and from experience find it not to their credit or advantage to remain in com- munion as formerly, they may dispense with the fellowship of C. as a branch of the Quarterly Meeting, in the manner of releasment from the 141 existing obligations of mutual compact. But they cannot justly annihilate C. and incorporate the members with either A. or B. The Monthly Meeting C. being released from its agreement with A. and B. as a component branch of the Quarterly Meeting, will revert to its original position previous to its union with A. and B. in the capacity of a Quarterly Meeting. From the premises laid down in relation to the nature and operation of the disciplinary prin- ciple of Friends, and in regard to the legal con- stitution of meetings for discipline, it must ap- pear self-evident that the proceedings under the name of Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting against Green street Monthly Meeting were without just reason, order or sanction, and consequently null and void. From the narrative of simple facts, it is unde- niable, that the active agents of a party called orthodox, entirely abandoned the disciplinary principle of Friends, which can only operate by love, condescension, and mutual concurrence. They reached forth the hand of force over the heads of the brethren, members of the same body or visible church, and instead of dwelling in the unity of the spirit which is the bond of peace, they from time to time systematized human pow- er, and openly declared war against all who 142 Would not join their ranks. All the devices and transactions that have taken place, in the party zeal of man. must remain forever separated from and foreign to the government of the true church. The formation of the orthodox into an isolated, active party of an exclusive character, in the bosom of Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, pro- duced a state of convulsion and anarchy, which entirely destroyed the efficiency of the Quarter- ly Meeting, and utterly disqualified it for any legal action whatever. But if the Quarterly Meeting had retained its judiciary functions, there was nothing before it to act upon in relation to Green street Monthly Meeting. There was no deficiency in the regular order of that meeting. It was the most quiet, most con- sistent and exemplary of any meeting in the city. There was no regular matter or subject, accord- ing to the specified duties of a Quarterly Meet- ing, at any time before it, in respect to Green street Monthly Meeting. There was neither legal object nor power to act, until Green street Monthly Meeting had dissolved its connexion with Philadelphia Quarter, and then all that could possibly be done in the case, was to acqui- esce in the act of that Monthly Meeting, which declared that its connexion with the Quarter, as a constituent branch, was dissolved. Green 143 street Monthly Meeting, having for a length of time been deprived of' all the advantages of a Quarterly Meeting, through the agency of an irreconilable party, whose dominant power had usurped the legal authority, believed that the existing state of society required, that this Monthly Meeting should be connected with a Quarterly Meeting in the sober exercise of its functions, and accordingly, that meeting applied, and was received into connexion with Abington Quarter. The propriety of the measure, if at all disputed, must be at issue only between the two Quarterly Meetings, and not between Green street Monthly and Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, and could therefore only be decided by the Yearly Meeting. Green street Monthly Meeting being received as an integral branch of Abington Quarter, un- doubtedly possessed all the rights and independ- ence inherent in any other Monthly Meeting within the union of the Yearly Meeting. How was it possible, on any valid ground, for Philadel- phia Quarter to affect the independence of Green street Monthly Meeting, more than that of any other. We have already seen there is no such power irt any Quarterly Meeting to lay down a Monthly Meeting without the consent or concurrence of its members. How could Philadelphia Quarter, then, reach Green street Monthly Meeting, which under a conviction of the incapacity of that meeting in its disorganized state, to exer- cise the functions of a Quarterly Meeting, had placed itself in connexion with another. From every view possible to take of the case in con- nexion with the principles of Friends, the whole proceedings of the orthodox party re- main nugatory. To corroborate the representations exhibited respecting the proceedings against Green street Monthly Meeting, by the active agents in Phi- ladelphia Quarter, a statement of facts published by direction of Green street Monthly Meeting is here subjoined, as follows: Jit an adjourned Monthly Meeting of Friends, held at Green street, Philadelphia, the 4th of 10th month, 1827. A verbal Committee having been appointed at our Monthly Meeting in the second month last, to prepare a statement of our grievances in order to be laid before the Yearly Meeting, produced at a succeeding meeting a document which was read and approved; and the subject again claim- ing the consideration of this meeting, it was on 145 the 20th. ult. submitted to a committee for re-ex _ animation j with instructions to make such amend- ments and additions as more recent occurrences render expedient and submit the same for the consideration of an adjourned meeting. The following statement produced by them being now read and deliberately considered was united with and directed to be recorded on our minutes. It was referred to the Committee to make such fur- ther disposition thereof as may appear most advi- sable. Extracted from the minutes. Joseph Warner, Clerk. A STATEMENT, &c. Believing that the present affecting state of our religious society demands that the facts which have been essentially its procuring cause, so far as Green street Monthly Meeting stands connected therewith, should the faithfully developed; and that the time has fully arrived when such an ex- position should be made, for the justification of the character of our Monthly Meeting, and for the purpose of fairly exhibiting its proceedings, that all may judge of them as they really exist: this Monthly Meeting conceives it has become its duty to record the following statement, 19 146 When the Quarterly Meeting of Philadelphia consented to the establishment of Green street Monthly Meetings the Discipline which had been adopted by the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia, was consequently admitted to be the rule which should regulate the operation of both the Quarter- ly and Monthly Meetings. In this book of Dis- cipline is the following clause in relation to Friends who may be concerned to visit, as min- isters, the different meetings of Friends, out of the limits of this Yearly Meeting, viz. ii Agreed, that when any Friend is religiously concerned to make a visit to the meetings of Friends beyond the limits of this Yearly Meeting, and has obtained a certificate for that purpose from the Monthiy Meeting of which he or she is a member, that the concern be also laid before the respective Quarterly Meeting for its concur- rence and endorsement," &c. Page 66. With such a certificate, and so endorsed, a ministering Friend applied, in the 12th month 1822, to visit the families of this meeting, which service being nearly completed, he attended our Monthly Meeting, and on presenting his certifi- cate an endorsement expressive of our unity with his Gospel labours amongst us, was, without a dis- senting voice, directed to be made on it. After whieh an elder of our meeting, in his official cap- 147 acity, in conjunction with several others; elders of the other city meetings; (who at this time and previously composed a self- constituted meeting of elders; concerting measures out of the order of society;) signed a paper which impeached the gospel ministry of the said Friend; and thereby counteracted and arraigned the judgement come to by this meeting: although this Friend; our el- der; was present when the endorsement was made; and so far concurred with it as to observe; when a proposition was made to alter it; that he u thought it would do." We are thus particular in stating these circum- stances; because we conscientiously believe that the sorrowful dissentions amongst us, have in great part grown out of this combination of elders. Next in order we think it right to state, that in consequence of this and other acts of opposition to the Monthly Meeting, the aforesaid elder was taken under care of the meeting, through the medium of its overseers. After which this Friend, in connexion with several others, parties in the ques tion at issue, (who together composed the greater part of our Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders,) requested assistance of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders in an abstract unspecified case: which request was acceded to, and, in the 11th month, 1823, a committee was 148 was appointed. This committee was continued in service more than a year. Within that inter- val, and after continued but unavailing efforts to eifect a reconciliation, a conclusion was come to by this Monthly Meeting, to release the aforesaid Friend from the station of an elder. The commit- tee then made a report, in which they complained that Green street Monthly Meeting had, in a sum mary way, taken the business out of their hands. But this allegation, we conceive, is not well found ed. Because, as before observed it can be prov- ed by the Friend's own acknowledgment, that the meeting by its overseers, had his case previously under care; and moreover the aforesaidcommittee had nocase specified, as the Disipline directs. We object to these proceedings for the follow- ing reasons: viz. 1. Because a considerable proportion of the most influential and active members of the Quar- terly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, being of the number of those that composed the self-con- stituted meeting of elders before alluded to, were parties in the case, and consequently, it could not be expected that they would adjudge against their own cause. 2. Because the Preparative Meeting o Ministers and Elders was not united in making the request And 149 3. Because those individuals who made the request were parties in the case. The next thing we notice is the circumstance that in the 11th month, 1824, the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders presented a remonstrance to the general Quarterly Meeting in the case of the Friend before alluded to, which arraigned Green street monthly Meeting before that meeting. In addition to this, a memorial was presented by the Friend himself, complaining of the con- duct of our Monthly Meeting in his case. This memorial was read by the clerk immediately af- ter the remonstrance, without observing the usual order of soci ety, which has been to appoint a committee to examine all unofficial documents, previously to their being read: the clerk thus taking on himself the responsibility of introducing into the meeting a complaint from one party, which now appears on record against us. These papers were admitted, or rather forced on the minutes of the general Quarterly Meeting, con- trary to the judgment expressed by a large part of said meeting. In reference to these transactions we remark, 1 . That the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, in taking up the case, or in making any representation to the general Quarterly Meeting 150 in relation to the subject, and more especially by its arraignment of our Monthly Meeting or its proceedings, committed a direct infraction upon that part of our Discipline which declares, that " none of the said meetings of Ministers and El- ders are in anywise to interfere with the business of any meeting for Discipline." Page 67. 2. The general Quarterly Meeting, by en- tering this remonstrance on its minutes, and by acting upon it, sanctioned this violation of our Discipline, and thus became a party against one of its branches, and by that act, virtually absolved Green street Monthly Meeting from further ac- countability to it as a superior meeting. 3. By admitting the memorial of our elder, as aforesaid, the Quarterly Meeting sanctioned and became accessary to a violation of the first principles of gospel order, recognized by our Discipline, viz. that endeavours be used by the party offended ' to obtain a reconciliation with the party offending, previously to any charge being preferred: agreeably to the injunction of Christ, " If thy brother shall trespass against thee ? go and tell him his fault, between thee and him alone," &c. (See introduction to Discipline. J This important requisition of the Discipline was neglected by our elder, who did not so much as inform our Monthly Meeting of his intention to arraign it before the Quarterly Meeting. 151 4. The Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders by coming to a judgment to make a remon- strance against our Monthly Meeting, constitu- ted itself a party against us. This fact was so far admitted by the general Quarterly Meeting, that when the case was referred, in the 5th mo. 1826, to the Yearly Meeting, and a committee was about to be appointed to represent it there a decision was come to, that the members of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders should be privileged to name out of that body one half of the said committee, and that the members of Green street Monthly Meeting might name the other half. 5. The same parties who composed the Quar- terly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and who had presented the aforesaid remonstrance, again, in the general Quarterly Meeting, sat in judg- ment against our Monthly Meeting, and were the active men in forcing the measure. In the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, in the 8th month, 1826, a second com- mittee was appointed, specially to advise and as- sist our Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders. This appointment was grounded upon a small abatement made in the answers to the que- ries received from said Preparative Meeting, al- though as great deficiencies were acknowledged 152 / in the answers received from at least one other Preparative Meeting. This committee reported the ministry unsound, on the accusation of one individual, and against the evidence of all the remaining part of the meet ing, and contrary to the official answers to the queries. This report was adopted by the Quar- terly Meeting. On the same evidence, the committee identifi- ed as an offender, a minister who then was, and continues to be in unity with the Monthly Meet ing, and, excepting his accuser, with the Prep- arative Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and sum moned him to attend before part of their num- ber, without the permission of the said Prepara- tive Meeting. Respecting these measures we make the follow- ing observations. i. In case of deficiencies acknowledged in the official answers to the queries, the extent of the power given by the Discipline to Quarterly Meet ings of Ministers and Elders is to counsel and advise their constituent Preparative Meetings. The words of the Discipline are, •• And in the said Quarterly Meetings, the queries are also to be read, with the answers which are brought from their Preparative Meetings, and the state of the members weightily considered, that, where occa- 153 sion requires it. advice and counsel may be sea- sonably extended, 77 &c. Page 66. The Quarterly Meeting, therefore, by undertaking to assist the Preparative Meeting, (by which was intended, as subsequent events demonstrated, to procure a charge against a member of the Pre- parative Meeting, in opposition to the sense and judgment of said meeting,) exhibited in its con- duct a manifest example of assumption of power. 2. The committee, by reporting the ministry unsound on the accusation of one individual, and contrary to the official answers, committed a direct infringement of that part of our discipline which directs, that " a timely and tender care be extended to such person according to gospel order; first by the individuals concerned, and then by the Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders to which he or she may belong:' 7 and that "should these labours prove unavailing, report of the case should be made by that meeting to the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and there a few friends be deputed to assist, 77 &c. fSee page <6&.J We say, this* proceeding of the committee was a direct violation of the Discipline — because, 1 . No labour on account Of unsoundness in min- istry had been extended by the Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders. 2.^ The 20 154 Preparative Meeting had not made the pre-re- quisite report to the Quarterly Meeting, which the Discipline expressly enjoins. 3. The com- mittee demonstrated a disposition of unkindly feeling to our preparative Meeting of Ministers and elders, by taking the accusation of one indi- vidual in opposition to our official answers to the queries, and by reporting accordingly. 3. The Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, by adopting this report, and by continu- ing the committee in service under such circum- stances, sanctioned this violation of Discipline and gospel order. 4. The committee by identifying and at- tempting to visit as an offender, a minister to whom no care had been extended by the said Preparative Meeting, and who was in unity both with the Monthly Meeting and the Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and by thus identifying him in opposition to the official an- swers to the queries, committed a direct infrac- tion upon the Discipline before cited, This act of the committee also involved a principle calculated to promote discord among the members of our Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders, and between said Preparative Meeting and the Monthly Meeting. It had also an obvi- ous tendency to obstruct the clear awswering of 155 the third Query, respecting ministers and elders, viz. "Are they in unity one with an another, and with the meeting they belong to, harmonious- ly labouring for truth's honour?" Page 96. We next state, that on account of open and continued opposition manifested by two of our women elders, not only to the Monthly Meeting but to particular members, this meeting, after having appointed a committee to take into con- sideration the relative standing of our elders, and after having, on their united report, weightily deliberated upon the subject, came to the judg- ment that the service of these two Friends had ceased as elders of the meeting. And according- ly they were released from said service, on the authority of the following Discipline. 1 . That part of the third Query, just cited, which requires that ministers and elders be il in unity one with another, and with the meeting they belong to." Page 96. 2. That part of our Discipline respecting elders, which directs that Monthly Meetings take care u that the Friends chosen for that ser- vice, be prudent, solid Friends, and that they do carefully discharge the trust confided to them." Page 63. Both these injunctions of the Disci- pline obviously make it obligatory on Monthly Meetings, to have such elders only as are in unity 156 with them, and also, to have none that are not qualified for the station, or that do not u careful- ly discharge the trust confided to them." 3. That part of our Discipline which directs what course shall be pursued in Meetings of Ministers and Elders in reference to the release of a member of those meetings wiio may "be thought, by negligence, unfaithfulness, or other- wise, to have lost his or her service in that station, so as to become the subject of uneasiness and bur- thensome" — Yet manifestly giving an antece- dent and paramount right and authority to Monthly Meetings, to take such individuals under care, in the words following: viz. " yet not so as to be under the care of a Meeting of Discipline on that account or for misconduct." The words " that account" manifestly referring to loss of service, by " negligence, unfaithfulness, or otherwise." P. 68. We believed, and we are confirmed in the correctness of the conclusion, that this last part of the Discipline cited, taken in connexion with the other two parts, fully authorized and enjoin- ed, this Monthly Meeting, on the ground that their service had ceased in that capacity, to re- lease the Friends before alluded to, from their station as elders in this meeting. And accord- ingly, as before observed, a minute was made to that effect. 157 Afterwards these Friends offered to the Quar- terly Meeting, a written communication, stating in general terms, that they were aggrieved by the proceedings of Green street Monthly Meeting, without specifying in what respects they consi- dered themselves aggrieved. A strong effort was then made in the Quar- terly Meeting, by certain members, to make this an appeal case; but this measure was overruled. Our representatives, and other members, at- tempted to explain what the alleged grievance was; but this was strenuously objected to, on the plea, that as the Quarterly Meeting was not officially informed of the nature and "merits of the case, it had no right, as a Quarterly Meeting, to know any thing about them; and hence was urged the necessity of appointing a committee to inquire into the circumstances. In this way the Quarterly Meeting came to the judgment that a committee should be ap- pointed to investigate into the nature of the sup- posed grievance, that a fair understanding might be had by the meeting, in respect to the propri- ety of hearing the complainants, and a committee was accordingly nominated. This committee undertook to transform the memorial of these elders into an appeal case, waited on our Month- ly Meeting, and requested it to appoint a com- 158 mittee to carry forward before them the minutes of our proceedings. But this meeting believing that the Quarterly Meeting's committee had not been authorized to take this course, that our Monthly Meeting was not authorized to sanction it, that by the Disci- pline the Quarterly Meeting itself had no juris- diction in the case, and also believing, not only on this account, but because of the great disunity in the Quarterly Meeting, that the appointment was irregular, declined nominating any commit- tee. The Quarterly Meeting's committee persisted, however, in their determination to make it an appeal; and accordingly, without any committee having been appointed by us, and without inform- ing the Quarterly Meeting what it was our meet- ing had done, reported it as their judgment, that the proceedings of Green street Monthly Meet- ing in relation to these two Friends, be annulled. Here again our representatives, and other members, attempted to explain, that it was, or had been constituted, an appeal for the office of an elder; that these two Friends had merely been released from that station: and moreover, the conversion of this case into an appeal, (in the sense in which that term is used in the Discipline) had been over-ruled by the preceding Quarterly 159 Meeting. But we were told, as we had been in some other cases offered to the consideration of the Quarterly Meeting, that "the members of Green street Meeting could not be heard." So that the Quarterly Meeting remains yet uninformed of the decision of our meeting, and also of the nature of the supposed grievance. Yet nevertheless a minute is recorded on the books of said Quarterly Meeting, adopting the judgment of the committee, that the proceedings of our meeting be annulled. To these measures we make the following ob- jections — 1. The committee transformed this case into an appeal, against the express under- standing of the Quarterly Meeting. 2. On their report, the Quarterly Meeting sanctioned this proceeding; and thereby assumed the principle, that committees have a right to exceed the instructions of the Meeting appoint- ing them to service. 3. There is no Discipline which recognizes a right to appeal for the office of an elder. 4. The Quarterly Meeting, by recognizing this case as an appeal, in effect assumed to itself the power to make discipline. 5 . By this act the Quarterly Meeting has de- nied to Monthly Meetings, their right of select- ing from among their own members, such as 160 they may deem most eligible to fill the offices of- said meetings; and has also assumed the right to oblige our Monthly Meeting to acknowledge such as the Quarterly Meeting may think suita- ble. 6. By this act the Quarterly Meeting has declared^ that although Monthly Meetings are competent to judge of the qualification of indi- viduals to serve them as eiders, yet they are not competent to judge of disqualification; or, in other words, the Quarterly Meeting has declared, that the power which appoints, is not sufficient to release an elder from that office. 7. By this act, the Quarterly Meeting has assumed the principle, that in a remonstrance or an appeal, it is not necessary that the meeting should know that the party has been deprived of any right or privilege by the act of a Monthly Meeting, or what the decision of the Monthly Meeting has been in relation to the party, prior to its reversal by the Quarterly Meeting. 8. The Quarterly Meeting, by adopting the report of the committee to annul the proceedings of Green street Monthly Meeting, decided the question which, at a previous Quarterly Meet- ing, when the case of the elder first alluded to was before it, it agreed to refer to the Yearly Meeting for its determination. 161 To proceed now with our narrative, it will be proper here to recur to the remonstrance of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders against our Monthly Meeting, and the memorial of the elder just noticed, and which, as has been mentioned, the general Quarterly Meeting con- cluded, in the 5th mo. 1826, to lay before the Yearly Meeting. In relation to the case grow- ing out of these, it will be sufficient to state, that owing to the disunity and discordant views appa- rent in the Yearly Meeting, this, with several important subjects that had come up from other Quarterly Meetings, was dismissed without being taken up — that body thus acknowledging itself incompetent to their adjudication. Hence our Monthly Meeting was necessarily left without a remedy, as it regarded the proceedings of Phi- ladelphia Quarterly Meeting. We will next direct our attention to the cir- it j * ^ " appointment of a comir the Quarterly Meeti isit he, Monthly Meetings. This appointment tool 11th mo, 1826; and alth< ttoit was so great tht that he could not -c ibiisly re i mes for it, yet after mud- ; e : in discussing the ;ard of the j 162 expressed by a large, if not the larger, part of the meeting, a committee was appointed. As it had become manifest by the proceedings of the Quarterly Meeting, that our rights as a Monthly Meeting would not be respected, it was concluded, after deliberate consideration, at a Monthly Meeting held 4th month last, to dissolve our connexion with Philadelphia Quarterly Meet- ing. A minute expressive of this conclusion was was made, and a committee appointed to give the information to the next Quarterly Meeting to be held in the 5th month. This was done by one of the Friends nominated to that service, who also laid on the table of the clerk, a copy of the minute of this Monthly Meeting on that subject, which was read. At this Quarterly Meeting the forementioned committee, which had been appointed to visit the Monthly Meetings, made a report, in which they recommended that Green street Monthly Meet- ing should be laid down, and its members attach- ed to the Northern District Monthly Meeting, which report was adopted. To these proceedings on the part of the Quar- terly Meeting, we object. 1. That previously to this act of the Quarterly Meeting of Philadel- phia, Green street Monthly Meeting had dissolv- ed its connexion with that meeting, and was 163 therefore not under its jurisdiction, and of this faet the Quarterly Meeting had been officially- informed. 2. In attempting to lay down our Monthly Meeting, without first obtaining its consent to the measure, the Quarterly Meeting broke the following discipline, viz. "It is agreed that no Quarterly Meeting be set up or laid down, with- out the consent of the Yearly Meeting; no Month- ly Meeting without the consent of the Quarterly Meeting; nor any Preparative or other meeting for business or worship till application to the Monthly Meeting is first made, and, when there approved, the consent of the Quarterly Meeting be also obtained." Page 32. By this rule it is manifest, that a Quarterly Meeting has no other power than to confirm Or prevent the setting up or laying down of a Monthly Meeting. It is also clear, that a Quarterly Meeting cannot lay down a " Prepa- rative or other Meeting for business or worship, till application to the Monthly Meeting is first made, and when there approved, the consent of the Quarterly Meeting be also obtained." The. terms " other meeting for business," in the clause, must include a Monthly Meeting. Ad- mitting, however, that they do not include a Monthly Meeting, it would be absurd to sup- 164 pose, that where there is no power to lay down an inferior, the power exists to lay down a supe- rior meeting. It follows, therefore, that Green street Monthly Meeting not having made such an application, the Quarterly Meeting had no authority to lay it down. ' 3. As the Discipline was the compact guar- anteed to this Monthly Meeting, and as what was not conceded in that compact was unquestiona- bly retained; or, in other words, as in accepting the Discipline when we became a branch of Phi- ladelphia Quarter, we gave no such power to lay down our meeting, it is not now to be implied that suck power was intended by the terms of the compact. 4. The absurdity of the application of the rule as construed by the'Quarterly Meeting, becomes evident when applied to the setting up of a Monthly Meeting without the consent of the parties who are to compose such meeting — the same principle clearly applying in both cases. 5. To suppose that the rights of a Monthly Meeting are to be transferred at the option of a Quarterly Meeting, is repugnant both to the letter and the spirit of the Discipline, as this would imply the existence of a power in the Quarterly Meeting, to attach us, as members, to any Monthly Meeting within the limits of the 165 said Quarter, notwithstanding the inconvenience or injustice that might be consequent on such a transfer. 6. Were it admitted that the Quarterly Meet- ing had the abstract right to lay down a Monthly Meeting without its consent, there w r as no valid reason existing for the procedure in the case of Green street Monthly Meeting. Our Monthly Meeting had not only been regularly kept up, and the Discipline administered with propriety, but we had been favoured to enjoy a greater de- gree of unity and harmony than any other of the Monthly Meetings in the city. For these and the above reasons, the proceeding of the Quar- terly Meeting of Philadelphia can only be re- garded as an arbitrary measure, unwarranted by Discipline. Our Monthly Meeting having, as has been stated, dissolved its connexion with Philadelphia Quarter, came also to the conclusion to apply to Abington Quarterly Meeting, to be received as a branch of that meeting. The application was accordingly brought before that Quarter, in the 5th month last, in Which, on a full and decided expression of the sense of that meeting, the pro- posal was agreed to, and a copy of the minute then made was directed to be sent down to our 166 Monthly Meeting, which from that period be- came a branch of Abington Quarterly Meeting. In justification of this step, we observe — 1. That the Quarterly Meeting of Philadel- phia by admitting on its records the proceedings of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and El- ders, in direct opposition to that rule of Disci- pline which says, ei None of the said meetings of Ministers and Elders are in anywise to interfere with business of any meeting for discipline," and by other infractions of the Discipline, noticed in this statement, did virtually release our Monthly Meeting from accountability to said Quarter as a superior meeting — it being evident that our subordination was to be in the order prescribed by the Discipline, and not out of it. And therefore as the Quarterly Meeting had departed from this order, we had a right, as a Monthly Meeting, to take any step, not prohibited by that compact, which would secure to us the enjoyment of our civil and religious privileges. 2. By attaching ourselves to Abington Quarter, we have departed neither from the letter nor the spirit of the Discipline: there is no provision in the former against such a step, neither is it im- plied by the latter that we are not to seek a peaceable and orderly retreat from an alarming infringement of our rights as a Monthly Meeting, 167 when, in seeking such a retreat, we connect ourselves with a Quarterly Meeting governed by the same Discipline. To conclude. While we deplore the desola- tion which exists in our borders, and feel that the waste places of Zion are many, we sincerely hope and believe that the period will arrive, when Jerusalem will become u a rejoicing, and her people a joy. ?? And desiring that we may keep the patience under all the trials we may be permitted to experience, we recommend to our members that they cultivate a spirit of forbear- ance and brotherly love, thereby evidencing that they are under the influence of that power which inspired the anthem of (( Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good will toward men." 169 CHAPTER XL INCONSISTENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. The maxim, that a society which does not often recur to first principles is in danger of going to decay, appears to have been verified in the society of Friends. The dust of three generations has been sufficient to cover from the sight of many of its members the true origin and constitution of some of the most effective institu- tions in the society. It must appear surprising to a reflecting mind, acquainted with the liberal nature and tendency of the principles of Friends, that the Meeting for Sufferings of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, in the year 1826 virtually de- clared itself a permanent body; or that its mem- bers were not removable by their constituents. The Southern Quarterly Meeting taking into consideration the state of its representation in the Meeting for Sufferings, judged it advisable to make a new nomination, which released two of its former representatives resident in the city, 22 170 who had taken an active part in measures contra- ry to its views, and to the declaration of a consid- reable number of their constituents in relation to matters of fact that had transpired within their own limits and knowledge. The release of those two members of the Meeting for Sufferings caused considerable sensation in that body, who encouraged them to present to it a remonstrance against the proceedings of the Quarterly Meet- ing in releasing them; which was received and acted upon, and the minute of the Quarterly Meeting appointing the new members was re- jected, and they denied the right and privilege of members. A committee was appointed by the Meeting for Sufferings to attend the South- ern Quarter, with a view to convince that meet- ing of the illegality of nominating new represen- atives whilst the former were willing to serve. A member of this committee used considerable argument to show that it never was intended to release the representatives from the Quarterly Meeting to the Meeting for Sufferings, except at their own request, These arguments failing to convince the Southern Quarter, that meeting adopted a minute, to be presented to the Yearly Meeting, remonstrating against the proceedings of the Meeting for Sufferings. It seems strange that the active agent of this committee, having 171 free access to the records of the society, should attempt, in the face of a Quarterly Meeting, to maintain a position so inconsistent with the na- ture of the case, and so much at variance with the fact. In recurring to the history of the Meeting for Sufferings of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, we find that this committee had its origin in the year 1756, during an Indian war, when Friends near the frontiers were subjected to considerable trial and hardship. The committee of correspond- ence with England suggested the propriety of raising additional funds and placing them at the disposal of a committee to be appointed in the most equitable way. Twelve members by the Yearly Meeting at large, and four from every Quarter to sit on their own adjournments. The duties assigned this committee were "to consider the cases of those brought under suffering at that time, by the Indians; to correspond with the Meeting for Sufferings in London; and to repre- sent the Yearly Meeting in all cases where the reputation and interest of truth required, provi- ded they did not meddle with matters of faith and discipline not already determined in the Yearly Meeting."* This committee was direct- * Yearly Meeting's minute in 1756. 172 ed to keep minutes of its proceedings and report them annually to the Yearly Meeting, which ap- pears by the records to have been done, and the committee was continued from year to year by the approbation of the Yearly Meeting. In 1761 the Yearly Meeting continued the Meeting for Sufferings in the " same manner it was constituted, reserving to each Quarterly Meeting their privilege of changing their repre- sentatives when they think proper." This min- ute was extracted from the record by James Pemberton, clerk to the meeting that year, and shows the judicious care of Friends at that time, to guard their rights, as well as to define the na- ture and duties of the Meeting for Sufferings. Had succeeding Yearly and Quarterly Meetings been sufficiently careful to renew, from time to time, their representatives, the Meeting for Suf - ferings never would have assumed that degree of importance and high tone in action that have been witnessed in latter years. It is not intended indiscriminately to censure the members of the Meeting for Sufferings. There have been many valuable individuals ex- ercising a place in this body, and they may have been of service in promoting the benevolent and philanthropic views of the society. But it can not be disguised that the principals in the ortho- 173 dox party, have for a number of years been giving a direction to the influence and power of the Meeting for Sufferings to favour their own views. A long succession of valuable individuals concentrating a considerable weight of religious character and talent in this meeting, had ren- dered it highly respectable in the view of the soeiety; and these orthodox members, entering into the labours of past generations, and feeling themselves in a situation to grasp, and circum- scribe within the compass of their power, the general control ofthe society, appear to have con- sidered the whole concern as their inheritance. Their views and opinions were raised into a stand- ard. Their dictum was assumed as a governing principle and no limits were to restrain the opera- tion of their designs. Nothing appears to have been wanting but civil power, to enable them to fulfil the models delineated by their prototypes in ancient times, when the voice of superstitious le- gitimacy resounded, the people have nothing to do with church or state but to obey them. Let us attend to undeniable fact. We have seen that in the 8th mo. 1822, the most active members ofthe Meeting for Sufferings, resolved themselves into a private conference, and under- took to decide both in relation to doctrine and discipline, at the expense of all order emanating from any institutions of the society. It may 174 be alleged they were here not acting in any- public character; but this more fully confirms both their disposition and determination, to sub- ject the society to their unconditional control: else, why act inconsistent with their public functions and private duties, in covertly moving forward as a dark body to interrupt the order and harmony of society. We have seen these men in 1823, bringing into action all their zeal and power, to introduce, through the Meeting for Sufferings, the sub- stance of their school acumen and notional opin- ions of theology, as a future standard of doctrinal faith, which might sanction ulterior movements in the adoption and consolidation of their exclu- sive system. So sanguine were they in the wisdom of their plan, and so sure of success, that an edition of their work was printed, and copies of it are said already to have been transmitted to England, even before it was covertly submit- ted to the Yearly Meeting, which so promptly rejected it. These facts distinctly express, more certainly than any form of words, that the duties of the Meeting for Sufferings, by the agency of a few active leaders, were strangely perverted from the original purpose, and instead of listen- ing to the calls of their constituents, the members of that meeting in effect declared themselves an 175 independent body. What other construction can be put upon the rejection of the nomination of the Southern Quarter. This construction is justified; by the subsequent procedure of those who continued to act as the Meeting for Suffer- ings in the second week of 4th mo. 1828. We have distinctly seen the origin of this meet- ing, that it was nothing more than a committee formed by representatives from the Yearly and Quarterly Meetings, and never had, nor can have any just power but what is derived from its con- stituents, who are the general Jbody of society. The general body of the Yearly Meeting, in recurrence to first principles, having been com- pelled, by the irregular proceedings of the ortho dox party, to reorganize the Yearly Meeting on the ancient foundation, free from party strife and incumbrance, was in session in regular order, ■representing about twenty thousand members, at the very period the remnant of this Meeting for Sufferings thought proper to exercise the shadow of its former power, and prepare for the ac- ceptance of their adherents, a declaration which goes clearly to manifest a disposition to join with the ancient opposers of Friends in an effort to un- christianize the society. What else could be the design of deliberately declaring and publishing to the world, by every means in their power, that the 176 reorganised Yearly Meeting that had dispensed with their services, " Openly deny the funda- mental doctrines of the Christian religion, as they are laid down by our blessed Redeemer and his apostles in the Holy Scriptures." This charge, and others of similar character, are believed only to be the Shibboleth of party distinction, or the exhibition of a specious pretence for doings un- justifiable on any acknowledged principles of the Society. It is hardly possible for these men to force their minds actually to believe that the great body of Friends have departed from the sensibilities of Truth, and the fundamental prin- ciples of society. Notwithstanding the derelic- tion of their accusers from the accustomed rela- tions of society, there is sufficient weight of reli- gious character left to put to the Blush the pro- moters of such deliberate and unfounded slander. The charges made can only be regarded by the dispassionate as the fleeting ebullitions of party prejudice, combined with a selfish policy to de- fend their cause by accusing their brethren. All the forced constructions and representations from isolated extracts, and external consider- ations, will fail to invalidate the christian princi- ples of Friends, if by habitual example they afford a practical evidence that their faith stands not in word only, but in that virtue of truth whic" srivps victorv over evil. 177 It is no wonder these men seek a defence in Doctrinal controversy, and cover their preten- sions with the veil of notional speculation. Ha- bitual deviation in practice, will ever lead from the simplicity of correct principle. Friends do not question their accusers respecting their faith; they do not in the least wish to circumscribe the exercise of it towards God in a pure conscience; but if they have stronger faith than their brethren, let them have it to themselves and show it by its fruits. Unhappily the fruits brought forth have greatly tended to lessen all confidence either in the purity or superiority of their faith. Does it accord with any fruit of the Gospel spirit for a few individuals to arrogate to themselves all the sound- ness of christian principle in the society, and upon that assumption claim absolute power to rule unrestrained? This certainly furnishes an affecting evidence of the desolating consequences resulting from that spirit of insubordination to the principles, and wonted practice of the society of Friends, which some of these men have so long persisted in to the violation of its peaceable testi- mony. The late "Declaration," said to be prepared in the Meeting for Sufferings, fraught as it is with virulent misrepresentations against the principal body of Friends composing Philadelphia Yearly 23 178 Meeting, is evidently the production of a mind much heated with party animosity . Glossed over with the sophisms of orthodoxy, it was evident- ly passed through the meetings whose name ft bears, as a lit instrument to ensure the present purpose of exhibiting an imposing appearance he- fore the public. It must however, vanish before the light of truth like the fleeting mists of the morning before the rising sun. It is not supposed that even the greater number remaining in the M r eeting for Sufferings cordially approve of all the doings of their active leaders, or are sufficiently aware of the tendency of their con- duct, much less arc all the other members of society still adhering to them. There are many sober judi- cious Friends who are at a loss to comprehend the real s^ate of things, whose minds are brought un- der great perplexity and suffering, and are held in a grievous state of bondage. Their fears are awakened by the spurious representations of un- soundness, and the deceitful exhibition of views the same in substance, but differing in words or terms. The devoted partizans of orthodoxy seem to cling with fastidious adherence to the outward circumstances and externals of the chris- tian dispensation, as if salvation depended on a correct apprehension of the letter or terms; while Friends, without calling these in question, prin- 179 cipally direct the attention to the original prin- ciple of all truth, and particularly insist on the necessity of experiencing its inward power and virtue. The orthodox are pleased to call this tf a refined spirituality/" and designate it as the fruit- ful source of that defection from their influence and power, which they so much deplore. But did not Friends always helieve in the spirituality of the kingdom of Christ? Has it not always been the dis- tinguishing principle of the Society, that every one possesses a seed of the kingdom in a measure of divine light, life, or grace? Are not the orthodox also ultimately obliged to admit a belief in the ope- ration of the divine spirit,as the effective means of salvation? Where then is the difference in point of substance. It seems only a misunderstanding of terms: but it is feared that in many instances wilful perversion is resorted to, in order to pro- mote the appearance of difference where in real- ity there is none. It is not the intention of the writer to enter into doctrinal controversy. He has a testimony a- gainst it; believing that opinionated speculation seldom stands in connexion with practical piety. It is time for christian professors to learn, that to our own Master we stand or fall, and that all saving faith is the gift of God. If we would se- dulously emulate each other in labours of love, 180 charity, and brotherly kindness, it would sooner draw to the true centre of unity, than all the la- boured criticisms on words or the dissection of terms, demolishing one opinion to rebuild ano- ther. Doubtful disputations may sharpen the wit, and bring into action the deceit of ingenuity; but will never better the heart nor improve the dispositions of any. For the sake of those tried minds who have been imposed upon by the representations of un- soundness, arising from speculation of equivocal terms, directed in a way to make it appear, that Friends deny the divinity of Christ while they lay claim to the doctrine of the spirit, the ju- dicious views of Thomas Ciarkson on the subject, as exhibited in his Portraiture of Quakerism, vol . 2nd. chap. 9th, are annexed. "The Quakers, then, believe that the spirit of God formed or created the world. They be- lieve that a portion of it was given to men, after this creation, as a guide to them in their spiritual concerns. They believe that this portion of it was continued to them after the deluge, in the same manner and for the same purposes, to the time of Christ. It was given, however, in this interval to different persons in different degrees. Thus Moses was more illuminated by it than his cotemporaries: for it became through him the 181 author of the law. Thus the prophets receiv- ed a greater portion of it than ordinary persons in their own times. In the time of Christ it continued the same office; but it was then given more diffusively than before, and also more diffu- sively to some than to others. Thus the evan- gelists and apostles received it in an extraordi- nary degree; and it became through them, and Jesus Christ, their head, the author of the gospel. But, besides its office of a spiritual light and guide to men in their spiritual concerns, during all the period now assigned, it became to them, as they attended to its influence, an inward Re- deemer, producing in them a new birth, and leading them to perfection. And as it was thus both a guide and inward redeemer so it has con- tinued these offices to the present day." " Now an objection will be made to the propo- sition, as I have just stated it, by some Christians* and even by those, who do not wish to derogate from the spirit of God, (for I have frequently heard it started by such,) that the Quakers, by means of these doctrines, make every thing of the spirit, and but little of Jesus Christ. I shall therefore notice this objection in this place, not so much with a view of answering it, as of attempt' ing to show, that Christians have not always a right apprehension of scriptural terms, and there- 182 fore that they sometimes quarrel with one another about trifles; or rather, that when they have dis- putes with each other, there is sometimes scarce- ly a shade of difference between them. To those who make the objection I shall des- cribe the proposition, which has been stated a- bove, in different terms. I shall leave out the words i Spirit of God/ and I shall wholly substitute the term ' Christ.' This I shall do upon the authority of some of our best divines. The pro- position will then run thus: God, by Christ, created the world, "for with- out him was not any thing made that was made." He made, by Christ also, the terrestial globe, on which we live. He made the whole host of heaven. He made therefore, besides our own, other planets and other worlds. He caused also, by Christ, the generation of all animated nature, and of course of the life and vital powers of man, He occasioned also, by the same Christ, the generation of reason or intellect, and of a spiritual faculty, to man. Man, however, had not long been created be- fore he fell into sin. It pleased God, therefore, that the same Christ, which had thus appeared in creation, should strive inwardly with man, and awaken his spiritual faculties, by which he 183 might be able to know good from evil, and to ob- tain inward redemption from the pollutions of sin. And this inward striving of Christ was to be with every man,, in after times, so that all would be inexcusable, and subjected to condem- nation, if they sinned." (i From this new statement of the proposition, which statement is consistent with the language of divines, it will appear that, if the Quakers have made every thing of the Spirit, and but little of Christ, I have made, to suit the objectors, every thing of Christ, and but little of the Spirit. Now I would ask, Where lies the difference be- tween the two statements? Which is the more accurate? or whether, when I say these things were done by the Spirit, and when I say that they were done by Christ, I do not state precise- ly the same proposition, or express the same thing. That Christ, in all the offices stated by the pro- position, is neither more nor less than the spirit of God, there can surely be no doubt. In looking at Christ, we are generally apt to view him with carnal eyes. We can seldom divest ourselves of the idea of a body belonging to him, though this was confessedly human, and can seldom consider him as a pure Principle or Fountain of Divine Light and Life to men. And yet it is obvious, 184 that we must view him in this light in the present ease; for, if he was at the creation of the world or with Moses at the delivery of the law, (which the proposition supposes,) he could not have been there in his carnal body, because this was not produced till centuries afterwards from the Vir- gin Mary. In this abstracted light the apostles frequently view Christ themselves. Thus St. Paul: " I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.' 7 * And again: "Know ye not your own- selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"! Now no person imagines that St. Paul had any idea, that the body of Christ was either in himself, or in others, on the occa- sions on which he has thus spoken. That Christ, as he held the offices contained in the proposition, was the spirit of God, we may pronounce from various views, which we may take of him, all of which seem to lead us to the same conclusion. And first let us look at Christ in the scriptural light, in which he has been held forth to us in the fourth section of the seventh chapter, where I have explained the particular notions of the Qua- kers relative to the new birth. God may be considered here as having produced, by means of ; * Galat. ii, 20. f 2 Cor. xiii, 5. 185 his Holy Spirit, a birth of divine life in the soul of " the body which had been prepared," and this birth was Christ. 6 . But that which is born of the Spirit / says St. John, But what are the wisdom of God and the power of God, but the great characteristics and the great constituent parts of his spirit?" It is hoped the discerning reader, by the ap- plication of the above extract, will perceive that many of the insinuations of unsoundness against friends arise from the use of equivocal terms, and not from any just or true ground. Friends ad- here to Scripture terms, and the primitive lan- guage of the society, in relation to doctrinal sub- * John iii, 6. f John iii, 34 \ Coloss. ii, 9. \ 1 Cor, i, 24. 24 186 jects, whilst the orthodox disputants in exhibit" ing their views of what they term the proper Di- vinity of Christ, and the exercise or application of his mediatorial offices, appear to adopt the phraseology of what is called "the reformed churches." There is safety in keeping to the form of sound words, and dwelling under that influ- ence of Truth, which preserves in " a pure language." However the doctrinal views of the orthodox may differ from the simplicity and purity of the fundamental principle of Friends, it should be distinctly understood that it has been their as- sumed power in disciplinary practice that has, of late, so much agitated the society. We do not censure private opinions; but claim the privilege of noticing those public fruits brought forth in- jurious to the rights of others. 187 CHAPTER XII. Dividing causes in the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia in the fourth month; 1827. The disorganized state of Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, and the unprecedented and over -bearing measures pursued in four of the city Monthly Meetings, raised a deep and feeling interest in the minds of many Friends, through the several Quarters of the Yearly Meet- ing. They felt for their brethren under pros- cription and oppression, and for the reputation and even the safety of society. It was apparent measures were in progress the fulfilment of which would greatly affect the vital interests of the society, by introducing habits of arbitrary rule instead of that mild equitable and consistent ad- ministration of discipline which is indispensable to the very nature and ends of religious fellow- ship. It was not difficult to foresee, that if those calling themselves orthodox succeeded in their views and plans in the city, the same system would be extended to the country Quarters. It was well known that great exertions had been made, for some years, to secure the interest of leading members in the country, by means of the mem- bers of the Meeting for Sufferings, and by anon- ymous publications, exhibiting distorted repre- sentations in relation to matters of fact, as well as doctrines. Agreeably to the theory and prac- tice of orthodoxy, if a few prominent characters were firmly secured in the several Quarters, their system would go into operation without any con- trol. If the elders and members of the Meeting for Sufferings, were sufficiently active to secure the clerk and to direct him in their several meet- ings, no difficulty was anticipated in regard to the body of society, whose feelings were not to be consulted or regarded. Unblushing attempts had already been made, to render both elders and members of the Meeting for Sufferings inde- pendent of their constituents, and, upon the same principle, there was nothing in the way to render clerks of the several meetings, permanent also. A distinct and separate order of persons engrossing all the direction of the affairs of socie- ty, would divest others of their disciplinary func- tions and then where would be the security of individual rights and liberty of conscience? These were not visionary fears. Previous to 189 the Yearly Meeting of 1827, they had, in the city, been realized. A great portion of the city members had often been declared unsound, and were not to be heard or regarded. They were virtually disfranchised, many of them were pro- scribed, some taken under dealing, on frivolous pretexts, and in a short time those denominated disaffected, or who would not yield to the dictum of orthodoxy, were to be "scattered to the four winds of heaven, as the dust of the summer thres- ing floor." Such were the attitude, the menaces, and doings of orthodoxy in the society of Friends, in the spring of 1827, within the limits of the Yearly- Meeting held in Philadelphia. From its origin in a selfish and exclusive spirit, we have traced the progress of orthodoxy, and may distinctly perceive, that it occupies the same place in relig- ious society, that aristocracy does in civil and political life. They are twin brothers, produced by power superceding right> and form the chief support of tyranny, and the very essence of ar- bitrary rule. From a knowledge of facts already transpir ed, and the gloomy forebodings of the future movements of that discordant and unfeeling spirit, which had produced such desolating ravages on the peace of the society, it was not 190 surprising that the sensibilities and sympathies of many Friends were particularly awakened in feeling solicitude, for the application of those means neccessary to interrupt the progress of ir- regular proceedings, and to deliver the society from the reproach resulting from the painful dis- orders that prevailed. The subject matter in rela tion to Green street Monthly Meeting which had so long distracted Philadelphia Quarterly Meet- ing, and which was referred to the Yearly Meet- ing, it was hoped would bring into action the constitutional powers of the Yearly Meeting to correct abuses, and stem the torrent of irregular procedure, produced by the aberrations of or- thodoxy, seeking the gratification of its own will. But such was the excited and deteriorated state of the Yearly Meeting, that instead of being able to act consistent with its own dignity, and place judgment upon the spirit of disorder and misrule, it confessed its incompetency to lay hold on sub- jects brought by minute before it. In the first sitting of the Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, a presage was given by the orthodox party that they were determined at all hazards to pursue their accustomed course of ex- clusive party measures. An abatement in the answer to the query respecting the soundness of the ministry being purposely brought from Phila- 191 delphia Quarter was made the pretext to nominate a committee to go down to the select Quarterly and Preparative Meetings, although the answers from all the other Quarters were satisfactory. The exception in that from Philadelphia Quarter was brought up from Pine street Preparative Meet ing, where it is well known there was no objection to their own ministers, and of course it was introdu ced to answer an ulterior purpose. The opposition to the proposal, in the Yearly Meeting of Ministers and elders was decided and unrelaxed, from an entire conviction that it was, in all its bearings, a distinct party measure. What was to be ex- pected from vesting with authority, and sending down to Quarterly and Preparative Meetings of Ministers and Elders, individuals who had so long violated all discipline and decorum by carrying measures over the heads of their brethren; and what possible object can we conceive in such an appointment, but to legalise their own assumption and unjust domination? Individuals who had long been aggressors, were to be invested with a commission to judge what and who were sound, and to establish their favourite dogmas over the heads of innocent and consistent Friends! Notwithstanding the strong opposition expres- sed to this measure, whilst sober and judicious Friends were remonstrating against it, the clerk, 192 in defiance of all decorum, filled up the outlines of his own conceptions in the case, and recorded the nomination of a committee congenial with the designs of his party. This was an absolute forcible measure in the midst of an assembly pro- fessing the principle of non-resistance, and many solid and judicious Friends saw there was no hope left, that the Yearly Meeting in its present state could answer the purposes of its institution. At a subsequent sitting a Friend proposed a reconsideration of this arbitrary measure — thus affording the orthodox party an opportunity of retracing their steps, and of mingling in condes- cension with their brethren; but they remained deaf to the voice of entreaty and conciliation, and by their unbending obstinacy forever can- celled the bond of union. The general Yearly Meeting met at the usual time, and passed the first sitting in the custom- ary way. The representatives from the several Quarters, were as usual, directed to bring for- ward to next sitting the name of a suitable Friend to serve the meeting as clerk, and one to assist him. They occupied all the time between the fore and afternoon sittings, without being able to come to any agreement on the nomination of a clerk. The orthodox party knew that their success depended upon the former clerk, who had 193 always assiduously devoted himself to the sup- port of their views. On the contrary the general body of Friends fully believed that the correction of existing abuses greatly depended upon a dis- interested and upright clerk, who would take the general voice of the meeting in deciding cases. It was ascertained there were about two thirds of the representatives Friends, and one third orthodox. The latter although they did not represent one sixth of the society yet they continued to debate with and amuse the represen- tatives until Friends again generally assembled, expecting by this means to secure the continuance of the former clerk. In the opening of the after- noon sitting an individual stated, that the repre- sentatives could not agree on any name for clerk, But it did not appear that the representatives agreed upon any report whatever, as the great- er part of them were interrupted while in the act of forming a report, by one of the committee opening the door and giving admission to the mem- bers who were collected without. Some of the representatives explicitly stated in the meeting, that no individual had been authorized to report that they (the representatives) could not agree — that on the contrary they had not finished their business, and expected to meet again to prepare a report. 25 194 Some individuals of the orthodox party may have agreed among themselves to make such a re- port, and this they probably did on the presump- tion that it would be a means of continuing the for- mer clerk. Accordingly an ancient Friend men- tioned his having attended the meeting sixty years and that when the representatives could not agree the former clerk had always been continu- ed. But the truth is, there never had been an instance of the representatives not being able to agree but on the present occasion, which proves the above declaration to be without any proper application. Upon this solid ground, however, the former clerk, with a full knowledge that he was not acceptable to the general body of the meeting, had the magnanimity to record his name as the self constituted organ of a party whose system of action was every day more clearly marking their departure from the unity of the society! Owing to the distracted state of the meeting, arising from the irreconcilable dissent of a party from the unity of the body, a Friend proposed on the next morning, an indefinite adjournment, hoping time might have the effect to cool the minds of active individuals, and bring them into that serious consideration, wherein a way might open for the restoration of that unity which is indispensable to transacting the affairs of religious 195 society in a consistent manner. This proposition was very generally approved, but could not be carried into effect, for the obvious reason that it did not accord with the views of the orthodox. They in fact retained the meeting in session to effect their own purposes, and having possession of the books, they persisted in the direction of the business, contrary to the voice of £he greater number of the members. Thus Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had arrived at a crisis when its regular operation was interrupted by the impos- ing weight of a party, wrapping themselves up in their separate interests, regardless of the voice or rights of the general body of their fellow members. This state of things required all the patience and equanimity of Friends, and brought many into close exercise that they might be en- abled to bear their burthen consistently with the nature of their peaceable testimony, till a way of deliverance might open in clearness. This ex- ercised patient state of mind, induced Friends to remain quiet spectators, to see what the party assuming the power and direction would do, and so far were they from manifesting any unbecom- ing resentment at being despoiled and deprived of their rights, that they mingled sympathies with their opposers by freely contributing to the re- lief of Friends in North Carolina, who were about 196 removing to a more safe asylum, the coloured people under their care. The orthodox party were sensible that their proceedings in the Yearly Meeting, in forcibly nominating a clerk and taking the direction of the business, were unconstitutional as they openly acknowledged their incompetency to take hold of the subjects which came up on the min- utes from several of the Quarterly Meetings. The cases from Bucks, Abington, and the Southern Quarters were dismissed. The case from Phila- delphia Quarter respecting Green street Monthly Meeting was, however, designedly referred back to that Quarter, and consequently left those two latter meetings under their former difficulties, without any hope of relief. This circumstance must stand as an additional evidence of that in- veterate prejudice and want of generosity which have so much characterized the orthodox party in their assumption of power. If it had not been to gratify their own selfishness why not dismiss the case from Philadelphia Quarter in the same way as the cases from the other Quarters? The fact was, the same individuals of the party being the active agents both in the Yearly Meeting and Philadelphia Quarter, it was placing the case back into their own hands, that they might without res- traint, accomplish their designs against Green street Monthly Meeting. 197 Their last act in the name of the Yearly Meet- ing was confessedly a distinct party measure — the appointment of a committee out of their ranks, to go down to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings for the purpose of subjecting these to their control and to establish the absolute power of orthodoxy in the Yearly Meeting and all its branches. The nomination of this committee was a violation of the voluntary concession previously made, that the meeting was not in a state to take any active step, which was the reason advanced for dismissing the business that came up from the Quarters, and ought certainly to have stood as abar to the adop- tion of any new measure- This self-appointed committee, in its progress, was generally rejected by the different meetings, as the mere tool of a party. When the representatives could not agree res- pecting the choice of a clerk, no legal organiza- tion nor action could take place in the Yearly Meeting, until that question was fairly settled. The whole proceedings of the orthodox party in conjunction with the clerk, who acted for them, were out of order, and entirely void in regard to the Yearly Meeting; for that society which is no lon- ger able to act in agreement with its first princi- ples, and which absolutely abandons them, de- stroys by its own power and operations its entire character and standing. 198 The interuption of the regular operation of the Yearly Meeting by the determined zeal of the orthodox brethren, was cause of painful exer- cise to many Friends, who, under the pressure of the existing state of the society, were drawn into deep sympathy with one another, desirous for best direction how to proceed under circumstances of a character so peculiarly trying and unprece- dented in the annals of the society. Many of the representatives, and other Friends, met lit conference, and after deliberate consideration judged it most expedient to exhibit to the mem- bers of the Yearly Meeting at large an outline of the actual state of things, and to invite them gene- rally to meet in conference on the first second day in the sixth month, that all might have an oppor- tunity to deliberate, and feel what was best to be done. The following is a copy of the minutes of the prodeedings, and "Address to Friends within the compass of the Yearly Meeting held in Phi- ladelphia," adopted on this momentous occasion. " At a meeting of a large number of Friends, from the different branches of the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia, convened at Green street meeting-house on the 19th of the 4th month, 1827, to confer together on the present unsettled 199 state of the society of Friends, and to consider what measures it may be proper to take, in the openings of Truth, to remedy the distressing evil: after a solemn pause, and under a deep sense of the weighty subject, it was unitedly concluded to address the members of this Yearly Meeting on the affecting occasion; for which purpose an essay being produced, and some progress made in the consideration thereof, the meeting ad- journed, to meet again, by Divine permission, to- morrow evening. 4th Month, 20th. Friends again met, and resumed the consideration of the aforesaid Ad- dress, which, after deliberate attention, w r as, with some alterations, unanimously adopted, when the meeting adjourned, to meet again to-morrow. 4th Month, 21st. Friends assembled, pursuant to adjournment. The essay of an Address being again read, and weightily considered, it was agreed that it be signed on behalf of this meeting and that a suitable number of copies thereof be printed for distribution. To Friends within the compass of the Year- ly Meeting held in Philadelphia. Dear Friends, The members of the society of Friends have been permitted, in time past> to be partakers 200 together, under the Divine blessing, of the ex- cellent effects produced by the power of that gospel which was professed and lived in by the apostles; and which, after a long night of aposta- cy, was embraced by our worthy ancestors. We are prepared to record our full conviction, that this same Gospel continues to be open to us, and to all men, and is u the power of God unto salva- tion" to those that believe in and obey it. Its blessed fruits are love to God and love to man, manifested in life and conduct: and our early Friends gave ample proofs of the tendency and influence of the "new commandment" which Christ gave to his Disciples when he said, " A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another: as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." Through obedience to it, they became known and distinguished: acting under its sacred influence and government, they were made powerful instruments in opening the door of gospel liberty, and removing many of the fet- ters that had been formed in the dark night of superstition and error that preceded them. Hence they were prepared to promulgate the glorious truth, that God alone is the sovereign Lord of conscience, and that with this unalienable right, no power, civil or ecclesiastical, should ever interfere. This blessed liberty was amply en- 201 joyed among themselves; and through faithful- ness — not to speculative opinions, but to the light of Christ within — they were thus united in the one eternal, unchangeable spirit, and by it became of one heart and one mind. In this truly christian state, they were lights in the world, and as a city set on an hill which cannot be hid. Through their instrumentality, with the blessing of the Almighty upon their labours, our religious society became possessed of this very important spriritual inheritance, and we feel bound to en- deavour to preserve it, unfettered by the hand of man, and unalloyed with prescribed modes of faith, framed in the will and wisdom of the crea- ture. With this great object in view, our attention has been turned to the present condition of this Yearly Meeting, and its different branches; and, by evidence on every hand, we are constrained to declare, that the unity of this body is inter- rupted — that a division exists among us, devel- oping in its progress views which appear incom- patible with each other, and feelings averse to a reconcilation. Doctrines held by one part of society, and which we believe to be sound and edifying, are pronounced by the other part to be unsound and spurious. From this has resulted a state of things that has proved destructive of 26 1i02 peace and tranquility, and in which the fruits of love and condescension have been blasted, and the comforts and enjoyments even of social inter- course greatly diminished. Measures have been pursued which we deem oppressive, and in their nature and tendency calculated to undermine and destroy those benefits, to establish and perpetuate which, should be the purpose of every religious association. It is only under the influence of u the peaceable spirit and wisdom of Jesus" that discipline can he properly administered, or the affairs of the church transacted "with decency" and in order. This blessed influence is a wall of defence, on the right hand and on the left, protecting all, even the weakest of the flock; and within this sacred inclosure our rights and privileges repose, as in the bosom of society, in perfect security. On this foundation has rested that excellent order which the society of Friends has been favoured, in a good degree, to maintain in its transactions; this is the bond that has united its members to- gether, and enabled them to manage all their con- cerns in " forbearance and love of each other." But this blessed order has been infringed, both in the present Yearly Meeting, (producing unex- ampled disorder in some of its sittings,) and in many of its subordinate branches, and has proved J03 a fruitful source of the difficulties that now exist. It is under a solemn and deliberate view of this painful state of our affairs, that we feel bound to express to you, under a settled conviction of mind, that the period has fully come in which we ought to look towards making a quiet retreat from this scene of confusion, and we therefore re- commend to you deeply to weigh the momentous subject, and to adopt such a course as Truth, under solid and solemn deliberation, may point to in furtherance of this object, that our Society may again enjoy the free exercise of its rights and privileges. And we think proper to re- mind you, that we have no new Gospel to preach 5 nor any other foundation to lay than that already laid, and proclaimed by our fore- fathers, even 6i Christ within, the hope of glory" — "the power of God, and the wisdom of God." Neither have we any other system of Discipline to propose, than that which we alrea- dy possess, believing that, whilst we sincerely endeavour to live and walk consistently with our holy profession, and to administer it in the spirit of forbearance and love, it will be found sufficient for the government of the church. And whilst we cherish a reasonable hope to see our Zion, un- der the Divine blessing, loosen herself ¥. from the 204 bands of her neck," and put on her strength, and .Jerusalem her u beautiful garments," and our annual and other assemblies again crowned with that quietude and peace which become our christian profession; we feel an ardent desire that in all our proceedings tending to this end, our conduct towards all our brethren may, on every occasion, be marked with love and forbearance: that when reviled, we bless; when defamed, we entreat; and when persecuted, that we suffer it. Finally, brethren, we beseech you, u by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined toge- ther, in the same mind, and in the same judg- ment." And, now, we u commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified." Signed by direction and on behalf of the meeting by John Comly, Joshua Lippincott, . Robert Moore, John Hunt, William Mode, Stephen Stephens, Richard Barnard, Joseph G. Rowland, John Watson, William Wharton. (Buckingham. J 205 Having experienced, in the several sittings of this Conference, a confortable evidence of Divine regard, imparting strength and encour- agement to look forward to another friendly meeting together, this Meeting agrees to ad- journ to the first second day in the sixth month next, at ten o'clock in morning, at Green street meeting-house, Philadelphia, if the Lord per- mit." 306 CHAPTER XIII. OCCURRENCES IN CONNEXION WITH THE GENE- RAL, MEETING OF FRIENDS HELD, BY ADJOURN- MENTS, AT GREEN STREET MEETING-HOUSE, IN THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, ON THE 4TH AND 5TH DA.YS OF 6TH MONTH, 1827, PURSU- ANT TO AN ADJOURNMENT ON THE 21 ST OF FOURTH MONTH PREVIOUS. The orthodox party have inveighed with great virulence against Friends meeting in conference, as if none had a right without their permission; which affords additional evidence of their unrea- sonable assumption, in attempting to limit and impede their fellow members in the exercise of just rights guaranteed by every institution both religious and civil in this free country. The general conference, held on the first second day of the sixth month, was open to all the members of the Yearly Meeting, without ex- ception. The orthodox party had a right to attend if they thought proper, and take a part in the deliberations: but it certainly was understood that all were to meet on the ground of equality, 207 and that the concurrent views and feelings of the meeting would obtain sanction, conformably to the primitive practice of the society. The general body of Friends attending the late Yearly Meeting saw by the effects produced that great deviations from the principles of the society had taken place, and felt the necessity of recurring to first principles that a re-settlement in love and condescension might be experienced, and the society be preserved in accordance with fundamental principles. A general sympathy and fellow-feeling became renewedly awakened, and prevailed amongst Friends. The minds of many brethren in the country became deeply affected with the state of the society in Philadelphia, and their hearts being opened to those under suffering and bondage, they extended a kind and helping hand to them, in the same love and condescension which had always heretofore characterized the society. Green street Monthly Meeting having been long disquieted and annoyed by the menaces of the ruling orthodox party in Philadelphia Quar- ter, and having seen the same individuals inter- rupt the progress of the Yearly Meeting, and return back to Philadelphia Quarter the case relating to Green street meeting; after deliberate consideration, Green street Monthly Meeting in 208 the 5th month, concluded to dissolve its con- nexion with Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting. A minute expressive of this conclusion was made and a committee appointed to give information to the next Quarterly Meeting. This was done by one of the Friends appointed to that service, who also laid on the table a copy of the Monthly Meeting's minute on the subject, which was read. Green street Monthly Meeting having dissolved its connexion with Philadelphia Quarter, came to the conclusion to apply to Abington Quarterly Meeting to become a branch thereof; which, upon a full and deliberate expression of the sense of that meeting, was agreed to, and a copy of the minute then made by Abington Quarterly Meeting was directed to be sent to Green street Monthly Meeting, as one of its branches. Radnor Monthly Meeting, in the sueceeding month for similar reasons, and in the same way, also dissolved its connexion with Philadelphia Quarter, and became a branch of Abington. The great pressure of the existing state of the society tended to draw the minds of Friends into near sympathy and tender feeling for one anoth- er, and thus a way opened for relief to the op- pressed, on the primitive principle of love, con- descension, and brotherly kindness. A number of Friends, members of Pine street Monthly 209 Meeting, haying long considered themselves de- prived of the privileges and advantages of reli- gious society by the intolerant and overbearing disposition of the rulers of that meeting, after serious and deliberate consideration, concluded to adopt the following memorial to the Monthly Meeting. others, we trample over it in ourselves. The oppressed may be innocent, but the oppressor must be guilty. What responsibility is incurred, in at- tempting to coerce others in matters, respecting which their independence is equal to our own! The society of Friends in its first rise, bore ample and efficient testimony to those religious rights, and that christian liberty, which rest on the basis of immutable truth; and it is cause of deep regret that in the present day those rights and this liberty should have been invaded by any portion of the society in regard to their fellow professors. The attempt by a few individuals, to monopolize the disciplinary power of the so- ciety, and to give it a direction for promoting their own purposes, without regard to the equal rights of their brethren, is an incontrovertible feet which cannot be removed from the history 277 of recent transactions within the limits of the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia. Without particularizing the extraordinary proceedings against Elias Hicks, or dwelling on those overbearing measures frequently imposed upon Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, it may be asked, what else but a monopoly of power, by a few over the many, were the transactions at the time of holding the Yearly Meeting in the Fourth month, 1827, when the representatives were interrupted in their duty of nominating a clerk, and an individual placed in that charac- ter contrary to the feelings and desire of the body of the meeting? What else but a monopoly of power was the nomination of the self-constitu- ted committee in that meeting, to go down to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings, to over-awe or constrain them to act conformably to the man- dates of assumed orthodoxy? Let the result an- swer these questions. This committee, embra- cing the principal leaders in the orthodox party, was rejected by nearly all the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings, as having no official power; and those meetings, in consequence of the ortho- dox party interrupting the regular order of the society, generally agreed to re- organize the Yearly Meeting, on original principles and ac- cording to former practice. 278 The attempt of the orthodox party to enforce their exclusive views, in the different meetings for discipline wherever they could influence or control the clerk, was the immediate cause of producing the re -organization of the Yearly Meeting. How far the reception of any new religious opinions by the orthodox members ope- rated on their minds to induce them to set up a claim to be exclusively the society, in the midst of their brethren of equal right and unimpeacha- ble practice, is best known to themselves. — Friends have not called in question the right of private opinion. Whatever the peculiar views of the orthodox brethren may be on particular doctrinal subjects, no exception has been taken against them on this account. The point at issue was, the assumption and exercise of undue power. Controverted opinions have been left by Friends to stand or fall by their own merit. Nothing new has been adopted by them. They adhere with unshaken confidence to the fundamental principles of the society; and endeavour, through the renewings of Divine assistance, to maintain its testimonies and practice. In avoiding collision with the orthodox party in meetings for discipline, which formerly were so painful, and conducted so inconsistently with the character of religious men, Friends have 279 been governed by the peaceable principle of truth ; and have not detracted from any right of the orthodox members. These members have been left to their own choice, as far as respects themselves, and are only precluded, by the re- organization of the Yearly Meeting, from over- ruling and imposing on their brethren. The charge of unsoundness against Friends, so perse- veringly persisted in by the orthodox leaders, is without any real foundation; for the Yearly Meeting in its public character has made no de- claration whatever on controverted doctrinal points, and it is believed that the generality of the members are averse to controversial specula- tions. The true cause of this charge had its origin in the disappointment of those individuals, who have attempted, in an unprecedented man- ner, to impose their opinions and views on the society. As Friends maintained their rights and privileges with becoming respect and firmness, the orthodox brethren to cover their own arbi- trary proceedings and to sustain their unreasona- ble and unwarrantable pretensions to be exclu- sively the society, so as to entitle them to its re- putation and property, boldly preferred, in the fervour of their active zeal, a charge of unsound- ness against the principal part of this Yearly Meeting. Disinterested observers must revietv 280 with astonishment the extraordinary pretensions of individuals, who by a course of their own proceedings separated themselves from the unity _ of the general body of the Yearly Meeting and then claimed all the soundness, power, right, and property belonging to it! Who does not see that such pretensions must prove as futile, as they are novel and inconsistent with every principle of religious and civil society? It is not believed that the generality of those remaining with the orthodox party approve of those intolerant measures which have caused such painful disorders and divisions, or that they are disposed to deprive Friends of their just right and interest in the property belonging to the society. Various causes contribute to shut up the way of well disposed individuals, and retain them in bondage, so as to diminish their useful- ness and comfort, and place all their weight in that scale which tends to prolong existing diffi- culties, and the trials of Friends. In the midst of those trials to which Friends have been and still' are subjected by the overbearing pretensions of individuals, having no paramount right or power over other members of the society, it is cause of thankfulness that the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia have been pre- served in that moderation, consistency, and v 281 charity towards their opposers which become their profession. Friends in a near sympathy with each other under sufferings from the re- proaches, accusations and injustice of those who were formerly brethren, have been enabled to commit their cause to Him who judgeth righte- ously, and who sees the ruling motive and integ- rity of every heart, and can ultimately overrule these events for the spread and establishment of truth in the mind of man. FINIS, ERRATA. Page 32, line 3 from top, for 'judgment of the individuals,'read 'judgment of individuals.' 58, line 16 from top, for 'dispersed in Judea,' read 'dis» persed of Judah.' 75, line 2 from bottom, for 'Thomas Turner/ read 'Joseph Turner.' 79 line from top for 'Walter Mifflin,' read 'Warner Mifflin.' and for 'John Cogwill/ read 'John Cowgill.' 88, lines 4 & 5 from top, for ' in Delaware,' read ' in the state of Delaware.' 98, line 16 from top, for ' 1st mo. 1827,' read ' 12th mo. 1826.' 104, line 6 from top, for ' (page ,)' in some copies, read '(page 33,)' MmsBm