St' ^rlfe 
 
 
 M2K3^ 
 
 L*opi 
 
 
 w 
 

 
 
 
 jlil,^^ ^^^'S^/ 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 
 3P 
 
 
 ^5L_ 
 
 ^ :: 
 
 
 3 > ! 
 
 ^Si 
 
 >:> j 
 
 §£> I 
 
 > > :. 
 
 S3^ ^ 
 
 j 
 
 >x> _ 
 
 ::»> | 
 
 
 
 > 5-* 
 
 
 J> 
 
 ^> 
 
 :>, 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 
 
 
 ^^/.&X4l54 
 
 ^%< 
 
 # ,Ws 
 
 ;• 
 
 UXITKD STAT: 
 
 IF AAIKillOA 
 
 lvJ>>* 
 
 
 
 >> 3 
 
 
 
 v *>>»lB> 
 

 .■•■-■*> -i ? ^& 
 
 fe^^^^^^" 
 
 1 m - i=J 
 
 
 
 
 
FRIENDLY LETTERS 
 
 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS, 
 
 ON SOME OF THEIR 
 
 DISTINGUISHING PRINCIPLES. 
 
 BY RALPH WARDLAW, D.D. 
 
 s of 
 
 GLASGOW, 
 
 ARCHIBALD FULLARTON & CO.; 
 
 A. Si C. BLACK, EDINBURGH; J. ROBERTSON & CO., DUBLIN; 
 
 AND WESTLEY & DAVIS, LONDON. 
 
 MDCCCXXXVI. 
 
% 
 
 s 
 
 
 GLASGOW: 
 Fl'I.LARTON A>D CO. PBINTEB8, VIU.APJ RL». 
 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 LETTER 1. 
 
 Introductory and Miscellaneous, ..... 1 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 On the Standard of Religious Truth and Duty, . . 38 
 
 LETTER III. 
 On the Standard of Religious Truth and Duty — Continued, 81 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 On Universal Inward Light, 124 
 
 LETTER V. 
 On the Gospel Doctrine of Justification, . • • 175 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 On Barclay's Views of Justification, .... 209 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 On the Scriptural Authority pleaded for the " Inward 
 
 Light," 234 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 On " the Perceptible Influence and Guidance of the Spirit 
 of Truth," 312 
 
LETTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY, AND MISCELLANEOUS. 
 
 Friends, 
 
 In so addressing you, I wish to be understood 
 as using, not merely the distinctive designation by 
 which you have chosen to denominate yourselves as 
 a body of professing Christians, but a designation 
 expressive of personal regard. I have not been an 
 inattentive or uninterested observer of the agitation 
 that has, for some time past, pervaded your society ; 
 and I have felt a strong inclination, blending with a 
 hardly less strong repugnance, to " show mine opin- 
 ion." — The cause of my repugnance may be easily 
 imagined. I may seem to many an officious inter- 
 meddler. I may fasten upon myself the unenviable 
 character of a gratuitous and forward disputant, fond 
 of the gauntlet, most unconscionably enamoured of 
 controversy, when I thus, as it will be thought, go so 
 far out of my way to find it, — when I cannot leave 
 
 A 
 
a Christian community, between which and myself 
 there subsists no bond of connexion, to carry on, 
 without interference, its own discussions, and settle 
 its own disputes. — The inclination, however, has 
 proved still stronger than the repugnance; and I 
 trust, that, when it is with friends I have to do, and 
 it is in the spirit of friendship that I enter their arena, 
 I shall not verify the proverb of the wise man, and, 
 in " meddling with strife that belongeth not to me," 
 find myself in the predicament of " one that taketh 
 a dog by the ears." 
 
 The inclination thus to address you has arisen from 
 two sources. — The first is, the esteem in which, on 
 various grounds, I have long been accustomed to hold 
 the Society of Friends; an esteem generated and 
 maintained by both public and private, official and 
 personal acquaintance. The part which they have 
 all along acted in a variety of the leading objects of 
 humanity and Christian benevolence, has entitled 
 them to it. They have been the staunch promoters 
 of the suppression of the slave-trade and the abolition 
 of slavery ; of the circulation of the Bible ; of uni- 
 versal education ; of the mitigation of our sangui- 
 nary penal code ; and of charitable relief in all its 
 forms. — Their high average character for simplicity, 
 integrity, and general moral worth, has entitled them 
 to it ; a character which, with whatever amount of 
 exceptions, either as to practice or principle, it may be 
 
regarded^could never have been so extensively earn- 
 ed, and so long maintained, without a corresponding 
 reality. While I can smile at some of their pecu- 
 liarities, and gravely condemn others, I yet cannot 
 but hold them, as a body, in affectionate respect. — 
 And this respect, resting on public grounds, has been 
 confirmed by personal acquaintance, and the intima- 
 cies of friendship. I may possibly have been for- 
 tunate in the individuals and families with whom I 
 have had the pleasure of intercourse, and the little 
 coteries of Quaker society into which circumstances 
 have thrown me ; but assuredly, from all with whom 
 I have come into contact, my favourable impressions 
 have received great accessions of strength. Those 
 among whom my lot has been cast, I have found, 
 not only the steady and zealous friends of every 
 measure of public benevolence, but amiable, social, 
 and kind in private intercourse, cheerful without 
 levity, and serious without moroseness. I have sel- 
 dom felt happier than when in the bosom of their 
 domestic and friendly circles. — Now, you must be 
 aware, that in proportion to the degree in which our 
 esteem and affection are engaged, the deeper becomes 
 our regret, that in those who are the objects of them 
 there should be aught which we are constrained to 
 disapprove ; and especially when this is the case in 
 what relates to their spiritual and eternal interests, — 
 compared with which, in the Christian's estimate, all 
 a 2 
 
else is lighter than vanity. — It is thus I have felt 
 towards you. In the Quaker system of doctrine and 
 practice, as expounded in those works which have 
 heretofore been considered as the accredited stand- 
 ards of their profession, there have appeared to me 
 such defects and errors, as well as such confused and 
 indefinite generality on essential points, as are incon- 
 sistent with a Scriptural faith and a true subjection 
 to Christ, detrimental to the spiritual life, and even 
 hazardous to the soul's salvation. — You will pardon 
 me, then, if, in these circumstances, affection prompts 
 to remonstrance. When the young man came to our 
 blessed Master, inquiring the terms of admission into 
 the kingdom of heaven, it is said that " Jesus, be- 
 holding him, loved him." The Saviour's affection, 
 in this case, was not, we may be assured, that of com- 
 placency in his principles and character ; for he had 
 spoken of himself with all the vain self-sufficiency of 
 the Pharisee, unconscious of defect, and elated with 
 the expectation of such a flattering reception as he 
 conceived due to his merits, — a state of mind in which 
 he who came " to seek and to save that which was 
 lost" must have felt any thing but satisfaction : — it 
 was the tenderness of compassion, a feeling engendered 
 in that gracious bosom by the sight of a youth, it is 
 not unlikely of interesting and prepossessing appear- 
 ance, labouring under such miserable self-delusion, — 
 puffed up with self-righteous conceit, and, judging by 
 
the test to which he was immediately brought by him 
 who " knew what was in man," " loving this present 
 world," and, with an ungenerous selfishness, " laying 
 up for himself treasures upon earth." Jesus " be- 
 held" this youth with the " pity" which " melts the 
 mind to love ;" and, the tenderer that affectionate 
 compassion, the severer would be the pang with which, 
 aware of the result, he applied the test, and sent him 
 away " sorrowful." — In this, as in every thing else, 
 our Redeemer has " left us an example that we should 
 follow his steps." I quote the case at present, with 
 no further application, than as it exemplifies the prin- 
 ciple by which we should ever seek to be actuated. 
 Whatever be the nature and grounds of our affec- 
 tion, there cannot be a greater mistake than that we 
 should spare those we love ; that we should prefer 
 their pleasure to their profit ; that we should rather 
 leave them in delusion than disturb their repose ; 
 rather let them hold their errors than subject them to 
 the pain of their discovery. This would be hatred, 
 not love ; cruelty, not kindness. There is no greater 
 favour we can do to a friend, than displacing error in 
 his mind, and introducing truth. And according to 
 the measure of our friendship, and the importance of 
 the error and the truth, will be our solicitude to ac- 
 complish this end. 
 
 The second source of the interest I have felt in 
 the recent agitations of your Society, is to be found in 
 a3 
 
the part formerly taken by me in a controversy which 
 involves the essential elements of Christianity. I 
 mean, of course, that which relates to the Socinian 
 heresy. The connexion here you will find no diffi- 
 culty in discerning. The remarkable and melancholy 
 fact, of so large a secession from your community in 
 the United States to errors of a quite analogous de- 
 scription, if they may not even be pronounced identi- 
 cal, very naturally, as you will allow, drew my atten- 
 tion, and stimulated inquiry as to the tendency of 
 some of your principles. Even although, in the 
 Quaker system, there were some things which ap- 
 peared the very antipodes of Socinianism, — the lat- 
 ter discarding every thing of the nature of direct 
 divine influence on the human mind, and avowedly 
 inimical to all spiritual excitement, presenting a 
 scheme of self-sufficient and frigid rationalism ; — yet 
 there were other points respecting which, it seemed 
 to me, it would be far from easy to acquit them of 
 the imputation of a tendency to such a result, al- 
 though that tendency may generally, in regard at 
 least to outward profession, have been counteracted 
 by other causes. In saying so, I have a special ref- 
 erence in my mind to the views entertained by Qua- 
 kers respecting the Holy Scriptures ; — the secondary 
 place which they assign to them ; their subordina- 
 tion, in point of authority, to the inward light ; and 
 the difficulty, — in spite of all that can be said of its 
 
being a gift of the Spirit and not of nature., and a 
 benefit resulting from the merits of Christ's media- 
 tion, — of distinguishing, or at least maintaining the 
 distinction, in minds that are not sufficiently imbued 
 with a previous mysticism, between the light of the 
 Quaker and the reason of the Socinian. Even the 
 most intelligent Friends, while they lay down the dis- 
 tinction as an article of their system, find it no easy 
 matter to keep the two clear of each other in their 
 illustrations and reasonings. And if even in the 
 writings of such men this difficulty is apparent, how 
 much greater must it be to ordinary minds, unaccus- 
 tomed to discriminative thought ! — how much more 
 prevalent in such minds the propensity to confound 
 the two together, — universal light with universal rea- 
 son ! Of the Quaker sentiments respecting the 
 Scriptures I shall speak at large by and by : — at 
 present I merely hint at one of their tendencies, as 
 perhaps exemplified in a special case ; the idolizing 
 of the light having a similar effect on the mind of the 
 thorough-going Friend, in reducing the paramount 
 authority of Scripture as the direct and only stand- 
 ard of religious truth, with the idolizing of reason on 
 the mind of the thorough-going Socinian.* 
 
 * What Socinian could desire a loftier eulogy of Reason, than 
 is to be found in the words of one of your earliest writers, one 
 who may be reckoned among the founders of your Society — 
 William Penn ? " Right reason I mean — the Reason of the first 
 
8 
 
 Be not offended with me, when I say (for I say it 
 in kindness and under correction) that this tendency 
 is indebted, amongst Friends, for an augmentation of 
 its strength, to a prevailing deficiency in their sys- 
 tem of religious instruction, — that all-important 
 branch of early education which consists in the com- 
 munication of general religious knowledge to the 
 mind. I am anxious to avoid all inculpatory reflexion 
 that may not have foundation in fact. But is it not 
 so, that too little attention has been bestowed amongst 
 you on this department of tuition, — the informing of 
 the youthful mind as to the principles and general 
 contents of the inspired oracles, and as to the evi- 
 dences of their divine authority ? Is there generally, 
 among Friends, such a system of domestic scriptu- 
 ral instruction, or of such instruction in Sabbath 
 schools in cases where it is not enjoyed at home, as 
 is calculated to impart any thing like enlarged and 
 connected views of divine truth ? Is the mere prac- 
 tice of daily reading a portion of Scripture, with a 
 few moments of silence, however solemn, before and 
 after, as a domestic exercise, at all sufficient for such 
 a purpose ? Or are silent public meetings, — or meet- 
 nine verses of the first chapter of John. For so Tertullian 
 . gives us the word Logos ; and the Divine Reason is 
 one in all ; that lamp of God which lights our candle, and en- 
 lightens our darkness, and is the measure and test of our know- 
 ledge." — Quoted by Richard Ball, in his " Holy Scripture the 
 Test of Truth," Note, page 93. 
 
ings where, in that which is said, there is little or no 
 appeal to the sacred records, the direct movements of 
 the Spirit taking precedence of them, by any means 
 fitted to supply the deficiency ? It is easy, on such 
 a subject, to speak of the benefits of getting still, — 
 and to say many plausible things as to the necessity 
 in religion, both as a part of its essential exercises 
 and of the means of its growth, of meditation, and 
 quiet musing, and the introversion of the mind's eye 
 upon itself. But you should not forget, that to true 
 and profitable meditation materials of thought are 
 necessary. The mind that has little or no informa- 
 tion on the subjects of religious musing will gener- 
 ally muse to little purpose ; nay, as it can hardly be 
 an entire vacancy, I fear they are but sciolists in the 
 knowledge of human nature, who, in such circum- 
 stances, will commit it to its own thoughts without 
 the apprehension of pernicious rather than of salutary 
 results. Deem me not uncharitable, — tell me not 
 that I judge of others by myself, if I venture to 
 surmise, that, were there such a tribunal as a Qua- 
 ker confessional, there would come to light before it 
 many a thought of vanity, if not of worse than va- 
 nity, that has seemed a part of silent devotion. Nay, 
 is there no such sentiment among you as a jealousy 
 of the human tuition in question, as if it were an in- 
 terference with the province of the Holy Spirit, de- 
 rogatory to the supremacy and sufficiency of the 
 
10 
 
 inward light, and a taking of the mind, as it were, 
 out of the hands of God ? — And if I am right in 
 suspecting the prevalence amongst you, from such 
 causes, of a defect of information on religious sub- 
 jects, — may not the existence of this defect contri- 
 bute, in no small degree, to account for the fact of so 
 many, when controversial discussions do arise, being 
 shaken, and falling away ? Ignorance, or very par- 
 tial information, can never be a safe-guard against 
 error, or a preparative for withstanding either its 
 sapping and undermining insinuations, or its more 
 direct argumentative assaults. It is quite the con- 
 trary. In such circumstances, knowledge is power ; 
 ignorance weakness. The uninformed mind is taken 
 by surprise. With flimsy and confused conceptions 
 of truth itself, and little acquaintance with either the 
 evidence in its support or the objections against it, 
 it is quite unprepared to meet the arguments of her- 
 esy, and, when they are presented, in their imposing 
 dogmatism, or their subtle plausibility, is startled into 
 scepticism ere it is well aware. To commit the 
 young to the world in this state of ignorance, is like 
 sending out an uninstructed and inexperienced mari- 
 ner on a voyage, without giving him any information 
 of the rocks, and sands, and currents, and winds, to 
 be expected by him in his course, — without furnish- 
 ing him with a chart of the seas he has to traverse, 
 or showing him how to use it ; so that he is utterly 
 
II 
 
 unqualified for avoiding or for encountering the dan- 
 gers that lie in his track, and may find himself in the 
 very midst of perils from which escape is impossible, 
 while he is fancying nothing before him but a clear 
 sea, propitious breezes, and a safe haven. 
 
 In saying these things, I am anxious to guard 
 against two misconceptions. The first is, that I say 
 them in ignorance of the counsels, on the subject of 
 " parents and education," contained in the Society's 
 " Rules of Discipline with Advices," in which a care- 
 ful instruction in the contents of Holy Scripture is 
 recommended and urged on parents and guardians, 
 in extracts from the minutes and letters of many suc- 
 cessive yearly meetings. This would be a mistake. 
 I have the third edition of the " Rules of Discipline, 
 &c.," lying before me. The counsels therein given 
 on this important subject are excellent. It would 
 evince an unreasonable jealousy, and hypercritical 
 captiousness, to find any very material fault with 
 them. But this is not the present question. The 
 existence of these advices is one thing ; their reduc- 
 tion to practice is another. The question is, whe- 
 ther a practical conformity to these advices has been 
 generally prevalent in the Society ; — or whether the 
 Quaker youth, taken in the aggregate, do, in point of 
 fact, evince a fair average of Scriptural information. 
 — And here I would guard my reader against a sec- 
 ond misconception, — as if I intended to advance a 
 
12 
 
 charge of the contrary, without exceptions. Far 
 from it. I believe that there are exceptions, and I 
 rejoice to believe farther, that the number of these 
 exceptions is decidedly on the increase : — and I can- 
 not but regard the multiplication of instances of ex- 
 emplary attention, on the part of parents, to this 
 essential branch of their duty, as one of the gratify- 
 ing symptoms of a begun and advancing ameliora- 
 tion in the body. — But I more than fear I am right, 
 in conceiving the average amount of religious, that 
 is, of Scriptural knowledge, as having been, generally 
 speaking, in the Society of Friends, unhappily and 
 characteristically low. And the secondary place 
 which, in their standard works, and by the venerated * 
 fathers of the system, is assigned to the Divine vo- 
 lume, as the rule of faith and conduct, is quite suffi- 
 cient, independently of every thing else, to account 
 for the fact, as one which it was no more than reason- 
 able to anticipate. And even in the excellent ad- 
 vices in your Book of Discipline, there occur such 
 occasional allusions to your primary principle of the 
 inward light, and the immediate and independent 
 guidance of the Spirit, as to enfeeble the force of 
 that influence upon the conscience which they would 
 have possessed, had the Holy Scriptures been dis- 
 tinctly acknowledged as the supreme and only autho- 
 ritative test of religious truth, and source of religious 
 instruction. I refer to such sentences as these, which 
 
IS 
 
 occur in immediate connexion with the inculcation of 
 Scripture instruction : — " They " (parents) " will 
 " frequently feel the vast importance of doing their 
 " utmost to cultivate in their tender offspring a hum- 
 " ble obedience to the teachings of the Lord's Spirit; 
 :; and, as they advance in years, to establish in them a 
 " firm belief of the all-sufficiency of this holy Guide:"* 
 - — " On this principle," — (the correct and important 
 principle, that " we cannot of ourselves produce reli- 
 gion in the mind") — " we must make it our chief 
 w object to direct the early and constant attention of 
 " our offspring to the Spirit of Christ ivithin them, from 
 i; which alone can spring the fruits of righteousness :"f 
 — (i and in order hereunto," (that is, to their " in- 
 structing them in the nature and necessity of being 
 born from above, without which, our Lord declared, 
 no man shall see the kingdom of God") " that they 
 labour to bring them acquainted with the holy seed, 
 which is sown by the Divine hand in every heart for 
 that gracious end" — This last sentence occurs imme- 
 diately after the specification of the duty of " en- 
 couraging children, as well by example as by precept, 
 'to the frequent reading of the Holy Scriptures :" — 
 but it is evident, that instruction in those truths which 
 the Holy Scriptures reveal is not regarded, nor re- 
 commended, as the principal means of regeneration, 
 
 * Pages 203; '204. f Page 200, 
 
14 
 
 — but rather an early acquaintance with the inward 
 light, here intended (as the established nomenclature 
 of Quakerism might be adduced to show) by " the 
 holy seed which is sown by the Divine hand in every 
 heart for that gracious end." — And is it not a point 
 of fact, that, in the process of early religious educa- 
 tion, there has, amongst Friends, been more depend- 
 ence on this supposed " holy seed" than on the writ- 
 ten word, and a consequent disposition to leave the 
 desired effect chiefly to its operation ? Has there 
 not been, amongst the really well-disposed and seri- 
 ous members of your communion, more of a propen- 
 sity to encourage, in the terms of the same publica- 
 tion, " a humble waiting for, and feeling after, those 
 " secret and tender visitations of Divine love, which 
 " are afforded for the help and direction of all," — 
 than, by a steady and persevering process of Bibli- 
 cal instruction, to replenish the minds of the rising 
 generation with a well-digested knowledge of divine 
 truth ? — I have alluded, with satisfaction, to the mul- 
 tiplying instances amongst you of attention to Scrip- 
 tural instruction in the fulfilment of the parental trust. 
 It has been with a similar satisfaction, and a similar 
 anticipation of benefit, that I have heard of meetings 
 held with the rising youth of your Society by some of 
 your senior members, for the express purpose of read- 
 ing the Sacred volume, and explaining, in familiar 
 remark and conversation, its divine contents. But, 
 
15 
 
 in proportion as this has imparted pleasure, has the 
 information, on the other hand, distressed me, that 
 the practice has occasioned umbrage, awakened jea- 
 lousy, and drawn forth, from some of the more 
 staunch adherents of your testimonies, serious admo- 
 nition ; and that attempts have been made to suppress 
 these Bible classes, as if they were hazardous to your 
 principles ! Has not this been the case ? And do 
 you really think, that the spirit, from which proceeded 
 the suggestion of such counsels and such attempts, 
 could be the Spirit of God, — the Spirit by which the 
 Scriptures were dictated ? — that the same Spirit that 
 gave the lessons, gave also the advice to withhold 
 them ? — Are not such facts rather to be regarded as 
 additional evidence of the timidity and shyness (to 
 use the gentlest terms) which have existed among 
 you in regard to direct Biblical instruction, — spring- 
 ing from the apprehension, that too much regard to 
 the secondary rule might have the effect of drawing 
 off the attention of the rising youth from that which 
 you regard as primary ? The mistake and presump- 
 tion involved in such a sentiment, and in such a fear, 
 will be afterwards considered. 
 
 Allow me farther to ask you, whether, in Quaker 
 education, the object, to a very great extent, has not 
 been rather to fashion Friends than to make Chris- 
 tians ? — to impart acquaintance with distinguishing 
 peculiarities, rather than with great essential princi- 
 b 2 
 
pies ? — to train to external conformity, rather than to 
 impart mental illumination ? Has it not consisted in 
 rearing to habits of morality, — of simplicity in appear- 
 ance and manners, of integrity and truth in daily 
 intercourse, of humanity and kindness, of domestic 
 affection, of order, punctuality, industry, economy, 
 sobriety, and moderation, with all those other virtues 
 by which personal and social respectability, comfort, 
 and usefulness in the present world are promoted ; — 
 while too little attention has been shown to the in- 
 culcation of those great evangelical truths, in which 
 are contained the only motives to moral duty which 
 the God of the Gospel sanctions, — and the faith of 
 which, in their apostolic purity, is the grand principle 
 of the whole Christian character ? Has your moral 
 training been sufficiently founded in evangelical in- 
 struction, — in the knowledge and belief of divine 
 truths ? I fear not. Am I wrong ? I shall rejoice 
 to be assured that I am. But if, to any considerable 
 extent, my apprehension is well-founded, the error is 
 a grievous one, and perilous to souls. It separates 
 morality from religion ; duty from faith. Unless a 
 character be formed on Gospel principles, — its moral 
 virtues springing from the faith of divine truths, — -it 
 is essentially defective : — it is worse, — its very foun- 
 dation is wrong, — its primary elements unsound. 
 
 But is not the formation of characters of this de- 
 scription greatly encouraged by your regarding all 
 
17 
 
 belonging to the families of your Society as born 
 Quakers ? — as members of your community by na- 
 tural birth? The divine record tells us, that the 
 genuine subjects of Christ's spiritual kingdom are 
 " born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor 
 of the will of man, but of God." % It is the testimony 
 of the Redeemer's own lips — " Except a man be born 
 again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."f Is 
 sufficient, or indeed is any regard shown by Friends 
 to this, in reception to the privileges of membership ? 
 Is there, amongst them, any formal admission of the 
 young to their fellowship, or any formal application, 
 on the part of the young, for such admission ? Is 
 there any examination of their knowledge of divine 
 truth, or of the evidence of its having been to them 
 " the power of God unto salvation ?" — any investi- 
 gation into the Scriptural marks of a saving change 
 having passed upon them, — of their having been born 
 again ? If not, is it at all wonderful that there 
 should be found many growing up amongst you in 
 melancholy ignorance of divine truth, and conse- 
 quently without the distinctive influence of evangeli- 
 cal principle, and, amidst all the peculiarities of Qua- 
 kerism, and all the decencies, and proprieties, and 
 conventional virtues of society, with little of what the 
 Bible denominates " the power of godliness ?" — little 
 
 » John i. 12. f John iii. 3. 
 
 B3 
 
18 
 
 of the holiness of the saint, as distinguished from the 
 virtue of the moralist ? When there is a strict con- 
 formity maintained to those peculiar practices in 
 which the " testimonies" of Friends are regarded as 
 especially consisting, is not this apt to pass for enough, 
 and to supersede inquiry into what is, beyond con- 
 troversy and beyond comparison, more important, 
 the spiritual state and character of " the hidden man 
 of the heart ?" — I do not find, among your " Rule? 
 of Discipline," &c, any instructions with regard to 
 the application of the young for reception into your 
 religious communion, or the examination of their 
 knowledge, principles, and character, with this view, 
 I find particular directions on the subject of accurate 
 registration of births, &c. ; from which, as well as 
 from visible facts, I conclude, that all children of 
 Quaker parents, when born into the world, are born 
 into the Society, and grow up as acknowledged mem- 
 bers of it, without any subsequent investigation or 
 recognition, on the part of the body at large, or of 
 the particular meeting with which the parents hap- 
 pen to be connected. Is it to be wondered at, in 
 these circumstances, that there should not only exist 
 amongst you a great deficiency of religious informa- 
 tion, but an extraordinary diversity of religious opin- 
 ion ; — so that, to know a man to be a Quaker is to 
 have no sure or definite conception whatever of his 
 creed, or of any thing else than his conformity, more 
 
19 
 
 or less strictly maintained, to the marked external 
 peculiarities of the body ? 
 
 I hope I may be allowed still farther, without sub- 
 jecting myself to the imputation of " all unchari- 
 tableness," of the guilt of which imputation my in- 
 most soul would acquit me, to suggest it to you, as 
 one of the points of danger incident to a Society that 
 has stood out with so prominent a distinctiveness as 
 yours, that it is proportionally prone to admit the 
 influence, consciously or unconsciously, of the esprit 
 du corps, I put it to the truly and humbly pious 
 among you (for such I rejoice to know there are) 
 whether they are not sensible of a risk of this prin- 
 ciple having more exercise than it ought to have, not 
 only in keeping up attention to the outward badges 
 and the special testimonies of Quakerism, but even 
 in maintaining, to a certain degree, the high standard 
 of Quaker morality itself? The body has obtained a 
 character; and where such a character has been ob- 
 tained, I freely and gladly grant the credit of having 
 deserved it : for however frequently individuals may 
 impose on individuals, a whole bod} r of men cannot 
 be supposed to delude the community, and to main- 
 tain the delusion so successfully and so long. But 
 while I admit a reality corresponding to the reputa- 
 tion, I cannot, with the sense I have of the deceit- 
 fulness of my own heart, and with my eyes open to 
 the observation of others, be blind to the danger 
 
20 
 
 thence arising of the operation of motives of mingled 
 and dubious rectitude in the maintenance of it. 
 There is, I admit, a regard to character, such as, 
 both in individuals and in societies, is not only justifi- 
 able, but incumbent. Usefulness and influence are 
 dependent upon it. The possession of it is not merely 
 agreeable to ourselves ; it is profitable as a means of 
 doing good. But in our sinful world, and our state 
 of imperfection, there is no good that does not bor- 
 der upon evil. The bordering evil, in the present 
 case, is pride of character ; a self-complacency, which 
 finds cover and apology under principles of unques- 
 tionable propriety. May not the inquiry be de- 
 serving of a place, in the process of self-examination, 
 to what extent the morality of Quakerism may be 
 indebted to the reflexion, we must keep up the char- 
 acter of the body ? Which of the two considerations 
 most frequently and most readily presents itself to 
 the mind, respecting any action of doubtful correct- 
 ness — This would be inconsistent with my character 
 as a Friend> — or, this would be inconsistent with 
 my character as a Christian ? — And when deviations 
 from the line of duty have occurred, of a public and 
 discreditable nature, whether is the shock that is felt 
 more imputable to the injury sustained from it by 
 the reputation of the Society, — the blot cast upon 
 the fair fame of Friends, — or to the dishonour ac- 
 cruing to the name of Christ, and the wrong done to 
 
21 ' 
 
 the interests of true religion in general ? — I throw- 
 out these things, not as the insinuations of a spiteful 
 malice, or even of an uncharitable suspiciousness, 
 but as friendly hints for your ingenuous considera- 
 tion. And, since I am throwing out such sugges- 
 tions, may I be allowed to add another, — namely, 
 that even in the midst of all the external indications 
 of lowliness, there is imminent danger of the very 
 character to which I have alluded, and for which, 
 considered in itself, the Friends are justly esteemed 
 and commended, engendering a spirit that is, more 
 than any other, at variance w r ith the very genius of 
 the Gospel, in its primary and elementary principles, 
 the spirit I mean of self-righteous confidence towards 
 God. I know well, that there are those amongst 
 Friends, who will disown this temper of mind, and 
 confess themselves, with the truest humility, debtors 
 to mercy alone, through the merits, the sacrifice, and 
 the intercession of the Redeemer. But such, I am 
 inclined to think, will go along w T ith me in lamenting 
 the prevalence of it, to no inconsiderable extent, in 
 the body to which they belong. It is far, very far, 
 from being peculiar to Friends. It has its seat in 
 human nature, and the propensity to it is common to 
 them with all others. It is well to bear in remem- 
 brance, that, if this state of mind be cherished, our 
 Christian profession, according to the unequivocal 
 and frequent testimony of the Scriptures, is vain, 
 
22 
 
 The heart is not right with God; nor is any outward 
 obedience, springing from such a state of heart, ac- 
 ceptable in God's sight. There is not a little truth 
 in the saying, quoted by Dr Cox as that of an an- 
 cient father, that " there is no heresy in which, taken 
 " as a whole, there is not more of truth than error. 
 " So there might be more of food than poison in a 
 " fatal dish, in which, but for the food, the poison 
 " would never be tasted : still, the poison is more 
 " than sufficient to kill ; and is the food then an ad- 
 " vantage ?"* If there be one thing which, more than 
 
 * " Cox's Quakerism not Christianity, &c," page 149. For 
 my general opinion of the voluminous Work to which I have 
 thus referred, I may direct the reader to a Review of the Beacon 
 in the Scottish Congregational Magazine for March, 1835. I thus 
 avow myself the writer of that article. It has been since re- 
 printed in a Pamphlet, consisting of " Extracts from Periodical 
 Works on the Controversy amongst the Society of Friends ;" and 
 its contents have come under the censorship of an anonymous 
 writer, in a publication entitled " Truth vindicated, being an 
 Appeal to the Light of Christ within, and to the Testimony of 
 Holy Scripture, by way of answer to said Pamphlet." — It is no 
 more than justice to the writer of that little Work, to say, that 
 he is, in his principles, a consistent Quaker, standing up decidedly 
 for the " good old way" of Fox, and Perm, and Barclay, and for 
 the paramount authority of the " inward light" as the funda- 
 mental article of the system ; and denouncing " the Beacon," 
 with all who adopt its sentiments, — and I should violate my con- 
 science were I to say without reason, — as abandoning the origi- 
 nal and distinctive principles of Quakerism. — I may have occa- 
 sion to notice this publication, perhaps, again. At present I 
 have only to advert for a moment to a charge which the author is 
 pleased to bring against me, — the charge of great inconsistency, 
 
23 
 
 any other, according to the Scriptures, mars what- 
 ever has the appearance and reputation of goodness, 
 it is the spirit of self-righteousness. Till that is ef- 
 fectually eradicated, all is wrong. It is not the spirit 
 
 and imprudence, and " mistaken kindness," in having, " with my 
 " own hand," contributed to foster that " spirit of Pharisaical self- 
 " estimation" by an unsolicited testimony to " their high average 
 " character, as a body, for truth and integrity, for simplicity 
 " and humanity;" — for having "by any adulatory remarks, min- 
 " istered to that spirit which makes them more solicitous to 
 " maintain their reputation in the world, than humbly to approve 
 "themselves to their Divine Master." Page 17. — He considers 
 the bestowment of such commendation very much at variance 
 with the " wakeful and solicitous apprehension" expressed by 
 me for their (the Friends') spiritual danger, — and with my avowal 
 of being " alive to their spiritual interests, and regretting the 
 errors of their religious system." — I can only now plead Not guilty 
 to the charge. I deny that commendation and adulation are synony- 
 mous terms. I deny that it is inconsistent with the solicitude pro- 
 fessed to commend, however much it may be so to flatter. If the 
 commendation be deserved, the bestowment of it is no more than 
 what is necessary to impart weight to any accompanying repre- 
 hension or censure, by giving a right impression of the spirit by 
 which it is dictated. I am borne out in this by the example of 
 the Apostle of the Gentiles ; by whom, on various occasions, 
 due commendation is mingled with merited reproof. I ask this 
 staunch and apparently honest Friend, whether he would have 
 thought me acting fairly and generously, were I to have with- 
 held all commendation for really existing good, and to have ad- 
 ministered nothing but unmingled censure ? I cannot, in most 
 instances, commend his own logic ; nor can I, in all instances, 
 commend his temper ; but I do commend his honesty, and his 
 manly and unblenching avowal of his principles, — even although 
 I conceive them to be as ill-supported by him, as they are in 
 themselves unscriptural. I should think it wrong in me, to say 
 
24 
 
 of a sinner ; nor can it, in a sinner, be tolerated by 
 the God with whom he has to do. A sinner must be 
 a debtor to mercy ; and an humble sense of obliga- 
 tion to mercy through a divine Mediator is the pri- 
 mary and germinating principle of the renewed 
 character, — of the life of evangelical obedience. 
 
 When I had formed the resolution to address you, 
 and set rc^self, with that view, to a more studious 
 examination of the principles of your Society, I ex- 
 perienced an increase rather than a diminution of a 
 difficulty which, in common with others, I had pre- 
 viously felt, — the difficulty, namely, of ascertaining, 
 with any definitiveness, what these principles are. — 
 I do not complain of your having no Creed, no Con- 
 fession of Faith, no Thirty -nine Articles. There are - 
 other bodies of professing Christians who have none, 
 besides you. My own is one of them. But in these 
 bodies, there exists no such difficulty as the one I 
 have mentioned ; or, if it must be admitted to exist, 
 
 the one of these things, and not the other. — And, as to the 
 commendation, for which he censures me, contributing to the 
 very evil which I profess to deplore, — I have only to put it to 
 himself, whether it would have been possible for me to state the 
 danger, without stating the fact in which it originated. The 
 danger arose, in a great degree, from the very possession of the 
 character ; and the only course I could follow, consistently with 
 truth and candour, and all right feeling, was to state the truth, 
 and to admonish of the danger, — to commend in kindness, and 
 to warn in faithfulness. 
 
25 
 
 it is to nothing like the extent to which it prevails in 
 the Society of Friends. The fact is undeniable; and 
 is it not of itself sufficient evidence of the compara- 
 tively little regard that is shown amongst you to re- 
 ligious sentiments, or the articles of a man's belief, 
 provided there be a due adherence to what are em- 
 phatically called your Testimonies? — I have felt it a 
 matter of no easy determination, how far I should 
 regard the writings of the principal authors connected 
 with the body in the light of accredited standards of 
 its religious views : — then, in points on which such 
 authors differ from each other, which is the author- 
 ity I ought to prefer : — still further, from the unsa- 
 tisfactory and sometimes contradictory manner in 
 which the question — how far, and in what sense, the 
 Scriptures are to be regarded as a test of truth — is 
 treated by them, I have been puzzled what to think; this 
 being affirmed by one, half affirmed by a second, and 
 denied by a third, — and affirmed, and half affirmed, 
 and denied, in succession, even by the same individu- 
 al : — and last of all, some of your principles have 
 been involved by their expounders in such a mist of 
 mysticism, or in themselves are so much character- 
 ized by that attribute, that it becomes difficult to dis- 
 cern them at all, or at least to distinguish, with any 
 thing approaching to precision, their forms and di- 
 mensions. 
 
 There are, however, some leading points, which, 
 c 
 
26 
 
 whether, in these our days, — (days which not a few 
 of you, I believe, regard as days of degeneracy and 
 defection from true primitive Quakerism,) they are 
 definitely understood among yourselves or not, are 
 yet, in common parlance, considered as Quaker ten- 
 ets ; and they are, at all events, points on which a 
 correct understanding is a matter of supreme, I had 
 almost said of infinite^ importance : — and when the 
 results connected with them are contemplated, I might 
 use the term without incurring, even from Friends 
 themselves, the exemplary patterns of correct and 
 measured expression, the charge of going beyond 
 " the words of truth and soberness." — I refer espe- 
 cially to the primary authority of the inward light, 
 ■ — and to the secondary authority of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures. I do not, I presume, go too far, when I speak 
 of the former of these, — from which indeed the latter 
 is but a corollary, and hardly different from itself, — as 
 the foundation principle of Quakerism ; by a general 
 renunciation of which, the Society, even were it to 
 keep together, would be divested entirely of its ori- 
 ginal and primitive character, — and, though retaining 
 its designation, would be disowned, with tears of 
 shame and sorrow, as backsliding and apostate, by 
 every one of its hitherto venerated founders and fa- 
 thers. — It is plain, that, until these points are settled, 
 there is no common basis for the discussion and de- 
 cision of any other. Nay, more than this, — you 
 
27 
 
 cannot but be sensible, to what an extent the authority 
 of some of your other peculiarities of sentiment and 
 usage is involved in that of the " light within." In 
 my apprehension, Quakerism and the inward light 
 may be justly viewed as identically the same, and as 
 standing or falling together. In reading the writings 
 of Friends, — with the exception of some of their more 
 modern leaders, who discover in their statements a 
 much greater degree of rational and scriptural sim- 
 plicity, — there is an incessant recurrence of this light 
 — this universal, saving, inward light ; and in such a 
 variety of forms does it present itself, that one is 
 greatly at a loss what to make of it. It is reason, — 
 it is conscience, — it is grace, — it is the Word of God, 
 — it is Christ, — it is the Spirit, — it is God, — it is a 
 principle, — a seed, a substance, in which the Godhead, 
 Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, dwells: — it is natural, 
 — it is supernatural, — it mediates, — it propitiate s, — it 
 justifies, — it sanctifies, — it is, in theory and in effect, 
 tJie whole of salvation. These various representations 
 of the " light within" might be substantiated from 
 the writings of your accredited and most esteemed 
 leaders. — I cannot but feel, therefore, that, in taking 
 up this subject, I am taking up the essence of Qua- 
 kerism ; and that no inconsiderable proportion of the 
 points of difference, both in sentiment and in prac- 
 tice, by which your Society is distinguished from 
 other denominations, may find a place for appropri- 
 c2 
 
28 
 
 ate notice in the course of its illustration. Not that 
 it is my intention to touch upon all of these. By no 
 means. This would require a large volume. I shall 
 confine myself to two or three leading articles, of 
 which the connexion with the inward light is the most 
 immediate. 
 
 It is my wish to write freely and kindly. My respect 
 for you is most sincere ; but I should be unworthy of 
 any return of that respect on your part, if my respect 
 for truth were not still greater. We ought to cherish 
 the conviction, and invariably to act upon it, that we 
 cannot do each other a more valuable service, than 
 that of displacing error from each other's minds, and 
 substituting truth. — In the controversies at present 
 in agitation amongst you, and which have been chiefly 
 kindled by the " Beacon" light, it has grieved me 
 not a little to perceive so much solicitude about the 
 question, whether this and the other publication con- 
 tain what is according to Quakerism. The principal, 
 nay, in one view, the sole inquiry ought to be, whe- 
 ther they contain what is according to truth ? What 
 is the one question, compared with the other? There 
 is not a greater danger to the mind, in its investigation 
 of truth, than an excessive veneration for names. We 
 cannot bear to think of finding those whom we thus 
 venerate to have been in the wrong ; and especially, 
 if they have evinced their own sincerity, and increased 
 our reverential attachment, by sufferings endured 
 
29 
 
 for their opinions and practices. But, my respect- 
 ed friends, ought we to be more solicitous to find them 
 in the right, than to find God in the right ? It is not 
 the mind of Fox, or Penn, or Barclay, we should, on 
 any subject be anxious to ascertain : — it is the mind 
 of God. In the preface to Mr W. Newton's " Re- 
 monstrance to the Society of Friends," I find the 
 following statement : — " In a meeting which was held 
 " at the late annual conference of the Society of 
 " Friends in London, and intended especially for the 
 " instruction of the young, their attention was directed 
 " to the example of Penn, Barclay, and other ancient 
 " Friends ; and it was said by one of their ministers, 
 " that those who did not follow the principles laid 
 " down by them, — c who found any thing in the 
 " ' Scriptures which they had not found, were out of 
 " ' the narrow way, and were going in a tract which 
 " * led to the same point with the broad way, and that 
 " ' was destruction.' "• — This minister possibly might 
 mean no more, than that he himself was so fully con- 
 vinced of the sentiments of Penn and Barclay being 
 the Gospel, that he regarded all who dissented from 
 them as departing from the Gospel, and in consequent 
 danger of perdition. But, assuming the correctness 
 of the statement, I hope there are few amongst you 
 who will not agree with me in thinking that he " spoke 
 unadvisedly with his lips." Nothing could be more 
 mischievous, than thus to throw the minds of either 
 c 3 
 
30 
 
 old or young into the fetters of implicit faith in hu- 
 man infallibility ; — the infallibility too of men, who 
 differed from each other, who occasionally differed 
 from themselves, who differed still more from some 
 of the modern leaders of Quakerism, and, what is of 
 most importance, who differed, I apprehend, in no 
 trivial degree, from the apostles and prophets of the 
 Lamb. 
 
 The author of the " Beacon" makes his appeal 
 directly to the Scriptures, as the only standard by 
 which he will consent to be tried, — because, in his 
 estimation, the only authoritative test of religious 
 truth. The question is — Is he right in this ? If 
 another question is to be interposed — Does he speak 
 according to Barclay ? — let it be distinctly under- 
 stood, that the object of interposing this question is, 
 not to ascertain whether he speaks truth, but whe- 
 ther he speaks genuine Quakerism. The questions, 
 whether Isaac Crewdson be in the right, and whether 
 Isaac Crewdson be a true Quaker, are essentially 
 distinct. To identify them, is to assume the in- 
 fallible rectitude of Quakerism, and to settle every 
 controversy by appeal to human authority. I do not 
 question the right of the religious body to which the 
 writer of the Beacon belongs, to press upon him the 
 latter of the two inquiries. Every Christian com- 
 munity is, without doubt, entitled to say to each 
 of its members, respecting any sentiments he may be 
 
31 
 
 pleased to publish, — " These may be your opinions ; 
 they may be according to your views of the Scrip- 
 tures : — but they are not the opinions of our body ; 
 — and if you hold them, consistency and duty re- 
 quire, not that you trouble and distract the body, but 
 that you withdraw from it." — But while I grant this, 
 it should surely be also admitted, that a man may, by 
 various bonds, — both bonds of nature and bonds of 
 grace, — be attached to a particular community; that 
 he may still see not a little in it which he esteems good, 
 and worthy of being preserved and cherished ; and 
 that he may be reluctant to break his connexion, and 
 anxious, in the first instance, to do his utmost for the 
 rectification of what is wrong ; that so, should the 
 issue be the necessity of withdrawment on his part, 
 or exclusion on the part of the Society, he may, in 
 either case, have "a conscience void of offence," as 
 having a done what he could." Genuine affection 
 may thus be the instigator to disturbance. If the 
 peace that prevails have not its basis in truth, the 
 sooner it is unsettled the better. There cannot be a 
 desire more purely the dictate of genuine love, than 
 the desire to lead the objects of that love from error 
 to truth ; — and if, the moment we deem them in error, 
 we unceremoniously abandon them, the haste of re- 
 linquishment, being naturally interpreted as indicat- 
 ing the slightness of attachment, may diminish, if not 
 even destroy and invert, the influence of our counsel. 
 
32 
 
 Controversy is not in itself desirable ; but it may be 
 necessary ; and even those who are least inclined to 
 it may feel this " necessity laid upon them" by a 
 paramount sense of duty, — duty to truth, duty to 
 God, duty to their erring friends. The God of peace 
 is the God of truth; and there may be a peace which, 
 as the God of truth, he disowns. In the spiritual 
 world, as in the physical, stagnation may be more 
 perilous than tempest. The agitating storm of contro- 
 versy may at times be requisite, to purify the atmo- 
 sphere of Zion from its insidiously gathering, and 
 silently death-spreading miasmata* Every thing de- 
 pends on the tempers of mind in which controversy 
 is conducted : — and it should not be forgotten, that, 
 while " the meekness and gentleness of Christ" is 
 needful on the one hand, openness to light and con- 
 viction is no less indispensable on the other. I have 
 already adverted to the danger of an excessive de- 
 ference to human authority and to venerated names. 
 May the Spirit of truth preserve you from such a 
 state of mind as that which Dr Hancock expresses, 
 when he writes thus respecting the author of the 
 Beacon : — " But I hope he will never be so far self- 
 " deceived, as to propose to himself such an unattain- 
 " able object, as that of convincing the serious, 
 " weighty, and reflecting members of the Society, 
 " that they do not know their own doctrines, or that 
 " Scripture is against them ; and that for nearly two 
 
33 
 
 " hundred years, they have been supporting a weak 
 rt and brittle testimony, with the loss of life, and of 
 " liberty, and of property, in favour of principles 
 " which are now found to be delusive and pernicious 
 u errors." * — This is to be proof against conviction. 
 It is not to open the eyes, but to shut them, — to 
 " wink hard" against the admission of light. When 
 a writer deprecates the idea of Friends " moving one 
 " single step from any of their testimonies, to meet 
 " their fellow-christians of other denominations," and 
 assigns his reason for it in these terms — " Because 
 " we believe that the standard we have adopted is a 
 "fixed one, and that as it is, we apprehend, not of 
 " our own, but of divine appointment, therefore we 
 " cannot change it," f — he evidently assumes the very 
 
 * Defence of the Doctrines of immediate Revelation, &c, 
 pages 15, 16. 
 
 f Ibid, page 79. — Having thus adverted to Dr Hancock's De- 
 fence, I take the opportunity of saying, that, in my apprehen- 
 sion, he has been far from doing justice to the author of the 
 Beacon, but is chargeable, in his treatment of him, with a vio- 
 lation of the most imperative claims of charity. When he says, 
 page 1, " If I am not mistaken, there is a covert attack upon 
 " the fundamental principles of the Society, though the object is 
 " held out by the author to be a very different one," — he imputes 
 to him an insincerity, of which the amiable writer, I am very 
 sure, was most unconscious : — and when he adds, as his own vin- 
 dication for assailing his Work, — " to suffer such an attack to 
 " pass unnoticed from a quarter, in which age, and character, 
 " and station, must give it the greater weight, scarcely seems to 
 " be the duty of any one who has a firm belief in the truth of 
 
34 
 
 point in debate, the " divine appointment" of the 
 Quaker standard, whilst, at the same time, he leaves 
 the questions to be asked, what that standard is, and 
 on what description of evidence he rests the infallible 
 
 " our testimonies, and a desire to see them more generally estab- 
 " lished" — he seems to have forgotten that "age, and character, 
 " and station" ought the more to have commanded his respect, 
 and to have screened their possessor from surmises so injurious. 
 Yet they are repeatedly introduced. " There is evidently con- 
 " siderable address, in stating some of his propositions so warily 
 " as not positively to announce such a denial" — page 5: — in the 
 same page he speaks of "oblique insinuations;^ in page 15, of 
 his taking " another occasion" from a particular passage of Scrip- 
 ture " for covertly calling in question the doctrine of universal 
 " saving light ;" and, in pages 24, 25, of the terms " mysticism," 
 " quietism," and " a religion of feelings/' used by the author, 
 as " evidently traps laid to catch the feet of the unwary" and 
 expresses his belief that " none of the firm, and sound, and 
 weighty members of Christ's church amongst the Friends will be 
 entangled in the snare, or drawn away by the specious stratagem." 
 — Now to me it appears, that, if ever sentiments were pro- 
 pounded clearly and honestly, they are so in the Beacon. They 
 are any thing but ambiguous. And of this Dr H. seems himself 
 at times to be sensible ; for in the very page in which he speaks 
 of his " covertly calling in question the doctrine of universal 
 " saving light," he speaks also of " the author's avowed opinion 
 of the paramount authority of Scripture, paramount, I mean, to 
 that of the light of Christ in the soul ;" and whereas, in one of 
 the pages referred to, he talks of " snares" and " specious stra- 
 tagems," he, in another — page 76 — represents " the tendency of 
 " the Beacon as, in his view, very decided" — That the senti- 
 ments propounded in the Beacon are in opposition to some of 
 the fundamental principles of genuine Quakerism, it would be 
 hypocrisy in me to attempt denying. But I do deny that they 
 are propounded covertly, insnaringly, or with any portion of 
 
35 
 
 and immutable certainty of all its articles. Accord* 
 ing to Dr H. ? the Friends' Testimony has been main- 
 tained for two hundred years. I presume that, in 
 saying so, he refers not merely to any one or more 
 
 malus ajiimus. I conceive there is abundant internal evidence 
 in the little work itself, of a deeply pious and sincere desire after 
 truth, — evidence, both of a sound mind and an honest heart. 
 
 Thus much I feel myself called upon to say in behalf of the 
 author of the Beacon. I do not, however, consider myself 
 authorized, by either the rules of propriety or the dictates of 
 expediency, to enter here into any discussion of the public steps 
 which the Society, by their yearly and quarterly committees, 
 have thought it their duty to adopt, in regard to the book and 
 its author. Although in possession of materials which might 
 enable me to do so, I should, in making such a use of them, only 
 embroil myself in a disputation about rules and modes of pro- 
 cedure, and the respective rights of religious communities and 
 their individual members, instead of a controversy about impor- 
 tant principles of truth. It is with these I have to do. Regarding 
 the other I shall only say, that I can, by no means, approve, either 
 of the attempts made to induce the author to suppress the Bea- 
 con, or of the subsequent silencing of his ministry. The for- 
 mer, while it involved a tampering with conscience, and a fet- 
 tering of free discussion, implied also the strange inconsistency 
 of allowing him to hold his opinions, provided he would keep 
 them to himself for the future, and avow repentance for having 
 given them publicity : — whereas the opinions, being evidently on 
 momentous and fundamental points, were either (laying aside 
 the question of their truth or falsehood) consistent with sound 
 Quakerism, or they were not ; — if they were, why should they 
 be suppressed ? — and if they were not, suppression should not 
 have been enough ; — the author should have been required to 
 disown them, or to relinquish his connexion! with the Society, as 
 holding sentiments subversive of its leading principles. To have 
 been satisfied with suppression, would have been to be satisfied 
 
36 
 
 of their peculiar views and practices, but also to the 
 great principles of their system. Does he, then, 
 conceive, that the two centuries which have elapsed 
 since their adoption and promulgation by George 
 Fox are a sufficient guarantee for their truth ? If 
 he does, we may well ask him, why they were then 
 embraced. If at the time they were embraced, they 
 were, in any of their articles, new, then they were 
 different from what had been held during a much 
 longer term of prescription. Two centuries form 
 but a ninth part of what is past of the Christian era. 
 The principles, therefore, which were previously pro- 
 fessed, had a guarantee eight times surer than that 
 now pleaded for them ; and Isaac Crewdson is eight 
 
 with dishonesty ; — it would have been a constraining of him to 
 " hold the truth in unrighteousness," and, on the part of the 
 Society, a toleration of error, and a sacrificing, or at least a com- 
 promising, of important truth, for the sake of a merely apparent 
 and nominal unity. — As to the silencing of his ministry, while it 
 was liable to all the same objections, it seemed also to involve 
 the inconsistency of subjecting the ministry to the authority of 
 man, — of bringing the sentiments taught to some test different 
 from that of direct manifestation, — and thus of interfering with 
 the Spirit of God, or admitting that his dictates in one minister 
 might be inconsistent with his dictates in others ; — and, along 
 with this, the partiality of silencing in one the preaching of doc- 
 trines which were acknowledged by others, of deserved eminence, 
 to be, in almost all their essential elements, in harmony with 
 their own. — Consistency would have required the suppression of 
 other writings than the Beacon, and the silencing of other min- 
 istries than that of Isaac Crewdson. 
 
37 
 
 times less to blame in venturing to differ from George 
 Fox, than George Fox was in presuming to dissent 
 from all before him. But, indeed, we should protest 
 against all such calculations. The longer sentiments 
 have been held, it is true, and the more numerous 
 and respectable the names with which the profession 
 of them stands associated, self-diffidence should ren- 
 der us the more cautious and considerate in impugn- 
 ing them. But still, there is no period of prescrip- 
 tion by which error can be transmuted into truth, — 
 no term, however long, that can bring us under an 
 obligation to believe it. — The question now before 
 us is, whether there be any authentic and permanent 
 standard of religious truth and duty ; and, if there 
 be, what it is. To this question, with a special ref- 
 erence to the peculiar sentiments of Friends, I shall 
 beg your attention in my next letter. 
 Meantime believe me, 
 
 Yours very respectfully, 
 R. W. 
 
LETTER II. 
 
 ON THE STANDARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUTH 
 AND DUTY. 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 The question to which this and probably 
 another letter may be devoted, is, as I have already 
 hinted, one of primary importance, — one, without 
 the settlement of which it is impossible, with the 
 smallest satisfaction, to move a single step in our 
 inquiries after truth. I feel that I have no room to 
 set down my foot, till we have come to some agree- 
 ment here. I cannot reason with you, till we have 
 some common principles as to the test by which our 
 respective positions are to be tried, and truth to be 
 ascertained. And indeed this very question is one, 
 and a principal one too, of the articles of difference 
 between us. — I come, then, at once to the point. I 
 affirm the primary and paramount authority 
 of the Holy Scriptures, as the only reasonable 
 ground on which w 7 e can conduct any of our discus- 
 sions, — their supremacy, and their completeness, 
 as the standard of truth and duty in all matters of 
 
39 
 
 religion. — Here we are at issue. You deny my po- 
 sition. You affirm that there is another and a supe- 
 rior standard or rule, — called by you the " inward 
 Light/' or "Light within," — a phrase which, as 
 I have before noticed, is used by your writers in 
 strangely various though analogous senses, but which 
 I may here, it is presumed, understand as meaning 
 the Holy Spirit himself in his immediate sug- 
 gestions to the mind.— This you regard as pri- 
 mary, and the Scriptures as secondary. 
 
 Distinct conceptions are here of essential moment. 
 The manner in which some of your leading authori- 
 ties have treated this subject, discovers at times an 
 extraordinary confusion of ideas, and contradictori- 
 ness of statement ; so that when at one time I have 
 fancied I had got almost as much admitted as I could 
 wish in behalf of the authority of the Scriptures, I 
 have not proceeded far, till I have found the admis- 
 sion so qualified as in fact to nullify its meaning and 
 its worth. — There is, moreover, on this as on other 
 points, so much of what is true and excellent mixed 
 up with what is false and pernicious ; so much that 
 is true in one sense of the terms, but not true in an- 
 other ; and so much that is true to a certain point, 
 but loses the attribute of truth by the excess to which 
 it is driven ; that, to me at least, it has been a task 
 of no small perplexity, to winnow the false from the 
 true, and to know with certainty what I should re- 
 d 2 
 
40 
 
 ceive as the doctrine of Friends, and what not. There 
 is Jesuitism to be found elsewhere than in the Church 
 of Rome. Socinians have many a time exposed 
 themselves to the charge of employing the terms of 
 truth in such a way as to convey the essential ele- 
 ments of error. I would not impute this unworthy 
 artifice to any of your writers : but I have no alter- 
 native between this imputation and that of confused 
 conceptions. It is always a suspicious symptom of 
 the correctness of any doctrine, when it cannot be 
 stated in explicit terms, and the plain import of these 
 terms sustained throughout the discussion of it with 
 unequivocal consistency. 
 
 To avoid confusion, I shall take up the doctrine 
 relative to the authority of the Scriptures, as taught 
 by Barclay, — leaving any notice of the difference 
 between him and others to a future opportunity. And 
 I shall begin with an exemplification, from this writer, 
 of what I mean by using the language of truth to 
 convey error. — After having laid down his second 
 proposition, which affirms the doctrine of immediate 
 divine revelation, independent of, and superior to, 
 not only natural reason but the Holy Scriptures, and 
 possessing, to the mind that receives it, the same cer- 
 tainty as the first truths, that the whole is greater 
 than its part, and that two contradictories can neither 
 be both true, nor both false ; — he opens his illustra- 
 tion thus : — " It is very probable that many carnal 
 
41 
 
 u and natural Christians will oppose this proposition ; 
 " who, being wholly unacquainted with the movings 
 " and actings of God's Spirit upon their hearts, judge 
 " the same nothing necessary; and some are apt to 
 " flout at it as ridiculous : — yea, to that height are 
 " the generality of Christians apostatized and degen- 
 " erated, that, though there be not any thing more 
 " plainly asserted, more seriously recommended, or 
 " more certainly attested, in all the writings of the 
 ;< Holy Scriptures, yet nothing is less minded or more 
 " rejected, by all sorts of Christians, than immediate 
 " and divine revelation ; insomuch that once to lay 
 " claim to it is a matter of reproach. Whereas of 
 " old, none were judged Christians, but such as had 
 " the Spirit of Christ, Rom. viii. 9. But now, many 
 " do boldly call themselves Christians, who make no 
 " difficulty of confessing they are without it, and 
 " laugh at such as say they have it. Of old they 
 " were accounted the sons of God icho were led by 
 " the Spirit of God, ibid. ver. 14. But now, many 
 " aver themselves sons of God, who know nothing of 
 " this leader ; and he that affirms himself so led is, 
 " by the pretended orthodox of this age, presently 
 " proclaimed a heretic. The reason hereof is very 
 " manifest, viz. because many in these days, under 
 " the name of Christians, do experimentally find that 
 " they are not actuated nor led by God's Spirit; yea, 
 " many great doctors, divines, teachers, and bishops, 
 d 3 
 
42 
 
 " of Christianity (commonly so called) have wholly 
 " shut their ears from hearing, and their eyes from 
 " seeing, this inward Guide, and so are become 
 " strangers unto it ; whence they are, by their own 
 66 experience, brought to this strait, either to confess 
 " that they are as yet ignorant of God, and have 
 " only the shadow of knowledge, and not the true 
 " knowledge of him, or that this knowledge is ac- 
 " quired without immediate Revelation."* 
 
 I should have little if any hesitation in subscribing 
 to the entire contents of this paragraph. I believe 
 in " the movings and actings of God's Spirit upon 
 the heart." In a certain sense, I believe in " imme- 
 diate and divine revelation :" — that is, I believe, that, 
 in a way which we do not understand, and are warned 
 against expecting to understand (John iii. 8.), the 
 Holy Spirit operates upon the human mind, in im- 
 parting to it the spiritual discernment of the truth, 
 excellence, suitableness, and glory, of the testimony 
 of the Gospel contained in the Scriptures ; — so oper- 
 ates, as that, by the experience of the influence of 
 this testimony, the enlightened subject of it comes to 
 have " the witness in himself" of its divine original. 
 And this spiritual discernment may, in a modified 
 sense, be called the revealing of Christ to the mind. 
 But when Barclay applies the terms used by him to 
 
 * Barclay's Apology, &c, pages 19, 20. Edit. London, 1780. 
 
43 
 
 all who do not concur with him in his doctrine of the 
 equal, or rather the superior, authority of immediate 
 and independent revelations to those of the written 
 word, — and unchristianizes all suck, as coming under 
 the solemn sentence of exclusion — " if any man have 
 not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his;" — he 
 either deceives himself, or he deceives others; he 
 writes either ignorantly or jesuitically. — In proof of 
 this, observe. By immediate revelation he means a 
 revelation independent of the Scriptures, — not the 
 spiritual discovery merely of the excellence of what the 
 Scriptures contain, but a communication by the Spirit 
 to the mind, without and above them. Now, he is 
 quite correct in " distinguishing betwixt the certain 
 " knowledge of God and the uncertain ; betwixt the 
 M spiritual knowledge and the literal ; the saving 
 " heart-knowledge, and the soaring, airy, head-know- 
 " ledge," — and in affirming that " the former can be 
 " obtained by no other way than the inward, imme- 
 " diate manifestation and revelation of God's Spirit, 
 " shining in and upon the heart, enlightening and 
 " opening the understanding."* This is language 
 which I should have no objection to adopt ; but it 
 would be with the explanation, that the word im- 
 " mediate should be held as signifying, not that the 
 " manifestation" of the Spirit was independent of the 
 
 * Ibid, page 20. 
 
44. 
 
 toritten word, but only that the Spirit's operation was 
 directly upon the sinner's mind; — and the word 
 "revelation" not as meaning the discovery of new 
 and otherwise unknown doctrines, but the discovery 
 of the truth and excellence of those made known in 
 that word. This, however, is not the view of the 
 case intended by Barclay : — and therefore, when he 
 goes on to affirm, in unqualified terms, that this truth 
 " hath been acknowledged by some of the most re- 
 " fined and famous of all sorts of professors of Chris- 
 " tianity, in all ages;" "who being truly upright- 
 " hearted and earnest seekers of the Lord," " and 
 " finding a distaste and disgust of all other outward 
 " means," " have at last concluded with one voice, 
 " that there was no true knowledge of God, but that 
 " which is revealed inwardly by his own Spirit ;" — 
 he writes, I repeat, either ignorantly or jesuitically : 
 — for the fathers and others whom he quotes certainly 
 did not hold the sentiment as held by him. They 
 might use terms resembling, or even the same with 
 those which he uses ; but it would not have been in 
 the same sense in which he uses them. The imme- 
 diate teaching of the Spirit meant by them, and which 
 they might call revelation, is simply what I have 
 mentioned, — that divine illumination, by which the 
 truth and excellence of the doctrine contained in the 
 gospel testimony are discerned, and its power expe- 
 rienced. As an exemplification of what I mean, I 
 
45 
 
 may select the case of Luther. His language, quoted 
 by Barclay, is, that " no man can rightly know God, 
 " or understand the icord of God, unless he imme- 
 " diately receive it from the Holy Spirit; neither can 
 " any one receive it from the Holy Spirit except he 
 " find it by experience in himself; and in this expe- 
 " rience the Holy Ghost teacheth as in his own pro- 
 u per school ; out of which nothing is taught but 
 " mere talk."* It is obvious that this is not "reve- 
 " lation," or " immediate manifestation," in Barclay s 
 sense of the terms — (if it were, there would be no 
 difference between the Quaker doctrine on this sub- 
 ject and that of evangelical believers of other deno- 
 minations;) — it is only the spiritual discernment of 
 that truth which, in the word of God, or the Holy 
 Scriptures, is already revealed. 
 
 That there is at present, in the Society of Friends, 
 a growing deference to the authority of these Scrip- 
 tures, — that the disposition is gaining ground to make 
 them the ultimate standard of appeal, in matters of 
 religion, — a comparison of your older with your 
 more recent writers, as well as the progress of exist- 
 ing controversies, will not allow me to doubt ; and 
 you must excuse me for saying, that it is with special 
 pleasure I admit the conviction into my mind. The 
 authority of the inspired writings of the Old and 
 
 - Ibid, page 23. 
 
46 
 
 New Testament, is a subject respecting which there 
 appears amongst you an indefiniteness, inconsist- 
 ency, and even contradictoriness of statement, such 
 as would be marvellous, were it not that they are the 
 unavoidable result of what I may call your double 
 standard^ — your superior and inferior, your primary 
 and secondary rule. I might here quote from writers 
 in the present controversy ; but I should then have 
 it objected that these were not your accredited autho- 
 rities. I therefore prefer Barclay. I may afterwards 
 compare his statements with those of your most 
 highly and justly esteemed author of the present day, 
 Joseph John Gurney ; but in the mean time, let us 
 hear him who has, for so long a period, been appealed 
 to as the Oracle of your Society. 
 
 In the statement of Proposition II. entitled " Of 
 immediate revelation," after referring to the " testi- 
 mony of the Spirit," as, in all ages, the source of 
 the true knowledge of God, and affirming the con- 
 tinuance still of the same kind of revelation with that 
 given to " patriarchs, prophets, and apostles," — he 
 says : — " Moreover, these divine inward revelations, 
 " which we make absolutely necessary for the build- 
 " ing up of true faith, neither do nor ever can con- 
 " tradict the outward testimony of the Scriptures, or 
 " right and sound reason. Yet from hence it will 
 " not follow, that these divine revelations are to be 
 " subjected to the test, either of the outward testi- 
 
47 
 
 " mony of the Scriptures, or of the natural reason of 
 " man, as to a more noble or certain rule or touch- 
 u stone ; for this divine revelation, and inward illu- 
 " urination is that which is evident and clear of itself, 
 " forcing, by its own evidence and clearness, the 
 " well-disposed understanding to assent, irresistibly 
 " moving the same thereunto, even as the common 
 " principles of natural truths do move and incline the 
 " mind to a natural assent, — as, that the whole is 
 " greater than its part ; that two contradictories can 
 i( neither be both true nor both false " % — In the state- 
 ment of Proposition III. w Concerning the Scrip- 
 tures," — after enumerating, under three heads, his- 
 tory, prophecy, and doctrine, the contents of the 
 sacred volume, he proceeds thus : — " Nevertheless, 
 " because they are only a declaration of the Foun- 
 " tain, and not the fountain itself, therefore they are 
 " not to be esteemed the principal ground of all truth 
 " and knowledge, nor yet the adequate primary rule 
 " of faith and manners. Yet, because they give a 
 " true and faithful testimony of the first foundation, 
 " they are and may be esteemed a secondary rule, 
 " subordinate to the Spirit, from which they have all 
 " their excellency and certainty : for as by the inward 
 " testimony of the Spirit we do alone truly know 
 " them, so they testify, that the Spirit is that guide 
 
 * Apol. pages 18, 19. 
 
48 
 
 " by which the saints are led into all truth ; there- 
 " fore, according to the Scripture, the Spirit is the 
 " first and principal leader. Seeing, then, that we 
 " do therefore receive and believe the Scriptures, 
 " because they proceeded from the Spirit, for the 
 t€ very same reason is the Spirit more originally and 
 " principally the rule, according to the received 
 Ci maxim in the schools, Propter quod unumquodque 
 '" est tale, Mud ipsum est magis tale : that for which 
 " a thing is such, that thing itself is more such."* 
 
 Now let us, with all seriousness and candour, ex- 
 amine these statements, w T hich being purposely se- 
 lected from the propositions themselves laid down, se- 
 riatim, by Barclay, as the points which it is his aim to 
 establish, may be fairly regarded as expressed by him 
 in the most deliberately chosen and carefully weighed 
 terms. — Let the following observations, then, have 
 your ingenuous attention : — 
 
 1. The Holy Scriptures are acknowledged as a 
 rule, but not as the only, nor even as the primary 
 rule, of faith and of duty. There is something else 
 that is placed above them. What, then, is it? In 
 the answer to this question there appears a most 
 extraordinary fallacy ; the more extraordinary, from 
 its being so palpable, that one can hardly fancy it to 
 escape the detection even of a child. They are said 
 
 * Apol., pages 67, 68. 
 
49 
 
 to be " subordinate to the Spirit," and " the Spirit to 
 " be more originally and principally the rule." — But 
 surely the Spirit, personally considered, cannot, in any 
 propriety of speech, be called a rule. There is, I admit, 
 a figurative sense, in which one man may be said to 
 be a rule to another, — his example and authority being 
 meant. In this way, a father may be a rule to his 
 children ; and a good man a rule to his dependants, 
 and to all who know and revere his excellencies. 
 But if, when we speak of a father being a rule to his 
 children, we speak figuratively, and mean no more 
 than that his will is that rule; then what consistency 
 would there be in speaking of the father and his will 
 as if they were two distinct rules, the one primary 
 and the other secondary ? The will of the father, 
 in whatever way indicated, is obviously and properly 
 the rule, not the father himself. This is a truism, 
 scarcely worthy of being put into writing. But if 
 you admit this, you cannot withhold your assent to 
 the same statement, in the parallel case : — it is the 
 will or mind of the Spirit, that is obviously and pro- 
 perly the rule, not the Spirit himself; the will or mind 
 of the Spirit, in whatever way indicated, whether 
 mediately or immediately, whether, that is, through 
 the instrumentality of others, or directly to ourselves. 
 This is, or ought to be, sufficiently clear. For, what 
 is my rule, and what is yours ? My rule is, the re- 
 corded intimations of the mind of the Spirit in the 
 
 E 
 
50 
 
 sacred Scriptures .-—this is my primary, my second- 
 ary, my only rule ; the only light of my feet, the 
 only lamp of my path ; in following the guidance of 
 which, I do not disown the Spirit's immediate aid, — 
 but earnestly implore that aid, to preserve me from 
 all prejudice and every biassing influence that might 
 hinder me from discerning, or disincline me from 
 pursuing, the prescribed path. Your rule is double. 
 Your primary rule, you say, is the Spirit ; your sec- 
 ondary rule, the Scriptures. But when you say that 
 your primary rule is the Spirit, what do you mean, 
 or what can you mean by the Spirit, but the imme- 
 diate intimations of the Spirit to your own minds ? 
 The rule, in either case, lies in the intimations of the 
 Spirit; and the difference between us must inevitably 
 resolve itself into this ; that my primary rule is found 
 in the intimations of the Spirit to prophets and apos- 
 tles, while yours is found in the intimations of the 
 Spirit to yourselves. — On this subject, Barclay appears 
 to me chargeable with one or other of two things, — 
 a most marvellous confusion of ideas, or the most 
 disingenuous sophistry. He says — " When we doubt 
 " of the streams of any river or flood, we recur to the 
 " fountain itself; and, having found it, there we de- 
 4C sist ; we can go no farther, because there it springs 
 " out of the bowels of the earth, which are inscru- 
 " table. Even so, the writings and sayings of all 
 ? men we must bring to the Word of God, I mean 
 
51 
 
 " the Eternal Word, and if they agree hereunto, we 
 "stand there."* By "the Word of God," then, 
 to which, as to a test, " the writings and sayings of all 
 "men" are to be brought, he does not mean what 
 Christians in general so denominate — the Holy Scrip- 
 tures. On the contrary, the contents of these very 
 Scriptures are included among " the writings and say- 
 " ings of ail men," which are to be brought to his supe- 
 rior test, — " the Eternal Word," or, as in the same pa- 
 ragraph he terms it, "the Truth itself;" for he says, 
 " we may not call the Scriptures the principal foun- 
 " tain of all truth and knowledge, nor yet the first 
 " adequate rule of faith and manners ; because the 
 " principal fountain of truth must be the Truth itself; 
 " i. e. that whose certainty and authority depends not 
 " upon another." — Now here, I repeat, is either con- 
 fusion, or sophistry. Do you not perceive, that the 
 difference between you and us relates not at ail to 
 the Fountain of Truth, but to the communications 
 from that Fountain? The simple question is, not 
 whether God, the " Eternal Word," the " Truth 
 itself," be the Fountain of truth to us : — who doubts 
 it ? — but whether, on the one hand, there are in the 
 Holy Scriptures, such communications from this 
 Fountain as were designed to be the rule — the pri- 
 mary and only rule — of faith and manners, — or 
 
 * Apol., page 71. 
 
 e2 
 
52 
 
 whether, on the other hand, there are still communi- 
 cations made from this Fountain directly to ourselves, 
 which are the rule of primary authority. It is vain 
 to talk of the Fountain being superior to the streams, 
 and of our bringing every thing to the Fountain. 
 How is this to be done ? What is meant by bringing 
 any writing or saying of man to " the Eternal Word " 
 — to " the Truth itself? " Is not this to make the 
 direct communications from the Eternal Word, from 
 the Truth itself, to my own mind, the test of that 
 writing or saying ? If it means not this, what does 
 it mean ? And if it does mean this, then the com- 
 munications to the mind of each individual are con- 
 stituted the test of the communications to the mind 
 of every other individual. The mind and will of 
 God can be known in no other way than by some 
 revelation of them ; and it is this revelation, not God 
 himself, that must be the test of all that professes to 
 come from the same Source. Where, then, is this rev- 
 elation ? Is it the revelation contained in the Scrip- 
 tures, or is it the revelation made immediately to the 
 mind now ? " The writings and sayings of all men 
 " ive must bring to the Eternal Word." We must 
 do it. The upshot of the matter, then, is this. The 
 writings and sayings of the prophets and apostles are 
 amongst the " writings and sayings of all men." 
 There is a higher standard than they, namely, the 
 Spirit by which they spoke and wrote. To this 
 
53 
 
 higher standard Robert Barclay brings the writings 
 and sayings of these " holy men of God." But 
 Robert Barclay, when he leaves the prophets and 
 apostles, and goes above them to the Spirit Himself, 
 can know the mind of that Spirit in no other way 
 than by direct communication to his own mind. If 
 there be any other way, it must be in the regions of 
 mysticism, whither I must decline going to seek it. 
 — But the u writings and sayings of all men" com- 
 prehend also the writings and sayings of Robert 
 Barclay himself. I am bound to bring them too, in 
 the same way, to the same test. And so is each 
 reader bound to do with mine. When we speak, 
 therefore, of the Spirit as the primary rule, — seeing 
 this must mean, if it means any thing attainable or 
 even conceivable, the Spirit speaking to the indivi- 
 dual, it follows that each individual becomes to him- 
 self, in the communications of the Spirit to his own 
 mind, the standard of all that professes to be divine 
 communication to others ! — If there is a fallacy here, 
 I do not perceive it. Let us see, then, what conse- 
 quences follow ; and it will be for you to consider 
 whether you are prepared to admit them. 
 
 2. The most obvious sequence is, that you place 
 the communications of the Spirit to your own minds 
 above the communications of the Spirit to the inspired 
 writers of the Holy Scriptures. You will perhaps 
 deny this, and allege that you only place them on 
 e 3 
 
54 
 
 an equality, admitting that whatever contradicts the 
 Scriptures is, by that very contradiction, proved to 
 be an illusion, and to have no authority. To place 
 the two even on an equality, I might well regard as 
 presumption enough ; and I may show this hereafter. 
 But in truth you do more. The Spirit, according to 
 you, is above the Scriptures, — as the Author of a 
 book is above the book; as the fountain is above the 
 stream, or above the reservoir which it supplies. But, 
 since the Spirit can be known only by his communi- 
 cations, it must be these communications which 
 form the primary rule, and to which the Scrip- 
 tures are subordinate. When you wait for the 
 Spirit, and listen to the voice of the Spirit, you 
 wait for his suggestions to your minds, — you listen 
 to his voice as it addresses yourselves. It is, in fact, 
 therefore, to these suggestions and to that voice that 
 you give the designation of the primary rule ; and it 
 is to these that the suggestions and voice of the Spirit 
 in the Scriptures are secondary. If this is not plac- 
 ing the intimations of the Spirit to you above the 
 intimations of the same Spirit to the sacred penmen, 
 I know of no principles that will yield a legitimate 
 conclusion. — It will, therefore, follow further, that it 
 is more reasonable to try the Scriptures by your 
 immediate revelations, than to try the latter by the 
 former. The superior must be the test of the infe- 
 rior, — the primary of the secondary and subordinate. 
 
55 
 
 And Dr Hancock does indeed go all this length, in 
 consistency with himself and with the principles of 
 primitive Quakerism : — " I cannot admit," he says, 
 " that the Scriptures, divine and excellent as they 
 " are, and blessed, I trust, as means auxiliary to sal- 
 " vation, to thousands and millions, are to be placed 
 " above the teaching of Christ's Holy Spirit by im- 
 ' ' mediate revelation ; because I dare not, as mat- 
 " ter of principle, place the effect above the cause; 
 " in other words, the letter above the Spirit." And 
 again : " I maintain that, in this gospel day, there 
 " not only may be, but there is, such a revelation" 
 (immediate revelation that is) " and that, as it is from 
 "Christ himself, it cannot be made subservient to 
 " Scripture, though it can never contradict sound, 
 " and comprehensive, and impartial interpretation of 
 " Holy Scripture." — The same writer avows the senti- 
 ment, that the same kind of inspiration, or immediate 
 revelation, which was enjoyed by those holy men who 
 of old were commissioned to convey the mind and 
 will of God to others, has, under the gospel dispen- 
 sation, come to be possessed, as a common privilege, 
 by all believers. And Barclay interprets one inspired 
 Apostle, as pronouncing the anointing of the Spirit, 
 possessed by Christians universally, a surer test of 
 truth than even that Apostle's own writings. — If these 
 things be so, it necessarily follows, that immediate 
 revelation now may as reasonably be held the test of 
 
56 
 
 Scripture, as Scripture be held the test of immediate 
 revelation ; — nay, the Spirit himself being above the 
 word which he has dictated, the former is the more 
 reasonable of the two. We shall see more of this 
 immediately, under next particular. 
 
 3. This pretension to immediate revelation, — reve- 
 lation of the same kind and the same authority with 
 that contained in the Scriptures, has the manifest 
 tendency to reduce the value of these sacred Oracles, 
 and to render them of comparatively little use. — I 
 am well aware, that you will shrink from this con- 
 clusion, and indignantly refuse it. I am aware of 
 the high respect expressed for the sacred books by 
 many of your writers, as well as in the Rules of Dis- 
 cipline and Advices, published by authority of your 
 Society, and consisting of extracts from the minutes 
 and epistles of its annual meetings. I am aware, 
 that by Barclay himself there appears at times an 
 admission, in so many words, of the propriety of 
 using the Scriptures as a test of all subsequent reve- 
 lations. Thus, for example, he writes : — " In this 
 " respect above-mentioned, then, we have shown 
 " what service and use the Holy Scriptures, as man- 
 " aged in and by the Spirit, are of to the Church of 
 " God ; wherefore, we do account them a secondary 
 " rule. Moreover, because they are commonly ac- 
 " knowledged by all to have been written by the 
 " dictates of the Holy Spirit, and that the errors 
 
57 
 
 " which may be supposed by the injury of times to 
 " have slipt in, are not such but that there is a suffi- 
 " cient clear testimony left to all the essentials of the 
 " Christian faith ; we do look upon them as the only 
 " fit outward judge of controversies among Chris- 
 " tians; and that whatsoever doctrine is contrary unto 
 " their testimony may therefore justly be rejected as 
 " false. And for our parts, we are very willing, that 
 " all our doctrines and practices be tried by them ; 
 " which we never refused, nor ever shall, in all con- 
 " troversies with our adversaries, as the judge and 
 " test. We shall also be very willing to admit it as 
 " a positive certain maxim, That whatsoever any do, 
 "pretending to the Spirit, which is contrary to the 
 " Scriptures, be accounted and reckoned a delusion of 
 " the devil" &c. &c* — To this agree the words of 
 Mr Gurney : — " Scripture is a divinely authorized 
 " test, by which we must try not only all our senti- 
 " ments on matters of doctrine, but all our notions 
 " and opinions respecting right and wrong. c To the 
 " law and to the testimony: if they speak not accord- 
 " ing to this word ? it is because there is no light in 
 " them.' "f — And the sentiments of Friends are sum- 
 med up by Evans, in the following terms, chiefly 
 those of Barclay as just cited: — " They receive and 
 
 * Apol., pages 85, 86. 
 
 f Observations on the distinguishing Views and Practices of 
 the Society of Friends, Seventh edit, page 93. 
 
58 
 
 " believe in them as the most authentic and perfect 
 " declaration of Christian faith; the only fit outward 
 " judge and test of the soundness of doctrine; and 
 " they have ever declared their willingness that all 
 " their doctrines and principles should be tried by 
 " them ; and that whatsoever any, who profess to be 
 " guided by the Holy Spirit, either believe or do, 
 " which is contrary to, or inconsistent with, their 
 " divine testimony, should be accounted a delusion."* 
 All this, so far as it goes, is well ; and the use of 
 such language, along with general eulogies of the 
 Scriptures as " the most excellent writings in the world, 
 to which not only no other writings are to be pre- 
 ferred, but even, in divers respects, not comparable 
 thereto," — may render it difficult to persuade your- 
 selves, and difficult to convince some others, that 
 there is any thing in the views you hold of imme- 
 diate revelation that is disparaging to the inspired 
 writings. — But, in spite of all this, we cannot but 
 regard it as in the highest degree disparaging, to 
 speak of the Scriptures, as Barclay does above, in 
 the very paragraph in which he admits them to be a 
 test, as a secondary rule. There seems an air of 
 condescension in even assigning them this place, as 
 if it were going quite as far as was warrantable: con- 
 sidering " the service and use they are of to the church 
 
 * Exposition of the faith of the Religious Society of Friends, 
 &c, pages 236, 237. 
 
59 
 
 of God — Wherefore we do account them a secondary 
 rule?" There is the same air of condescending 
 courtesy, when elsewhere, in answering the objection, 
 " whether he does not hereby render the Scriptures 
 altogether uncertain, or useless," he says — " Not at 
 " all. The proposition itself declares how much I 
 " esteem them; and, provided that to the Spirit from 
 " which they came be but granted that place the 
 " Scriptures themselves give it, / do freely concede to 
 " the Scriptures the second place, even whatsoever 
 " they say of themselves, &c." — But what, I repeat, 
 is the meaning of " granting to the Spirit that place 
 which the Scriptures themselves give it?" The 
 meaning is, that the Spirit himself is the primary 
 rule. But in such a proposition, we have seen, the 
 Spirit himself cannot signify the Spirit personally ; 
 it can signify nothing else than immediate revelation. 
 It is this immediate revelation that is the primary 
 rule, and that takes precedence of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, while to them, is "freely conceded" the sec- 
 ond or subordinate place! Is this to honour the 
 Scriptures ? I cannot but regard all the compli- 
 mentary terms you can bestow upon these writings, 
 as — I will not say hypocritical, — but unmeaning and 
 worthless, so long as you hold the sentiment of their 
 being subordinate and secondary to your own imme- 
 diate revelations. It is vain to call this honouring 
 the Spirit : it is honouring yourselves : it is placing 
 
60 
 
 the dictates of the Spirit to you above the dictates 
 of the Spirit to the Scripture writers. Barclay says 
 — and he says it when he is speaking of the Holy 
 Scriptures, of the place they hold and the uses they 
 serve — " For though God doth principally and chiefly 
 " lead us by his Spirit, yet he sometimes conveys to 
 " us his comfort and consolation through his children, 
 " whom he raises up and inspires to speak or write a 
 a word in season, whereby the saints are made in- 
 " struments in the hands of the Lord to strengthen 
 " and encourage one another, which doth also tend 
 " to perfect and make them wise unto salvation ; and 
 " such as are led by the Spirit cannot neglect, but 
 " do naturally love, and are wonderfully cherished 
 " by, that which proceedeth from the same Spirit in 
 " another ; because such mutual emanations of the 
 " heavenly life tend to quicken the mind, when at 
 " any time it is overtaken with heaviness. Peter 
 " himself declares this to have been the end of his 
 " writing, 2 Pet. i. 12, 13. < Wherefore 1 will not be 
 " negligent to put you always in remembrance of 
 " these things, though ye know them, and be estab- 
 " lished in the present truth. Yea, I think it meet, 
 " as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up 
 " by putting you in remembrance. 
 
 " God is teacher of his people himself; and there 
 " is nothing more express than that such as are un- 
 " der the new covenant need no man to teach them ; 
 
61 
 
 "yet it was a fruit of Christ's ascension to send 
 " teachers and pastors for perfecting of the saints. 
 " So that the same work is ascribed to the Scriptures 
 " as to teachers ; the one to make the man of God 
 " perfect, the other for the perfecting of the saints. 
 " — As, then, teachers are not to go before the teach- 
 " ing of God himself under the new covenant, but to 
 " follow after it, neither are they to rob us of that 
 " great privilege which Christ hath purchased unto 
 " us by his blood : so neither is the Scripture to go 
 " before the teaching of the Spirit, or to rob us of 
 "it."* 
 
 Here comes out the truth, — the marrow of your 
 system on the present point. For here we have — 1. 
 The communications of the Spirit in the Scripture 
 writers placed on the same level, in authority and in 
 use, with those communications now, " whereby the 
 saints are made instruments in the hand of the Lord 
 to strengthen and encourage one another;" such 
 communications, equally with those of the Scriptures, 
 coming from such of God's children as he still " raises 
 up and inspires to speak or write a word in season:" 
 — 2. Ordinary teachers placed on the same level with 
 prophets and apostles, and the writings of the latter 
 made to occupy the same subordination to the sup- 
 posed new covenant privilege of immediate revela- 
 
 * Apol. pages 83, 84. 
 F 
 
62 
 
 tion, with the lessons and exhortations of the former ; 
 so that the Scriptures have no other and no higher 
 use than that of the addresses, written or spoken, of 
 ministers now, — the use namely, of helping forward 
 the influence of immediate revelation in ourselves, 
 this being superior to both : — 3. The Holy Scriptures 
 quoted, to disprove the necessity of their own instruc- 
 tions : — " God is teacher of his people himself" — 
 that is, directly, by the immediate communications of 
 his Spirit — " and nothing can be more express than 
 that such as are under the new covenant need no man 
 to teach them" Is not this to declare new covenant 
 believers, and that on the authority of Scripture it- 
 self, independent of Scripture teaching? Does it 
 not follow from this, that the chief lesson taught by 
 the New Testament Scriptures, is the lesson that they 
 themselves, though useful, are not necessary ? And 
 can any lesson be conceived more directly calculated 
 to discourage the study of them ? Can any thing 
 tend more to produce neglect of them, than to tell a 
 man that he can do without them, — that he has a 
 higher teacher than they, by whom he is rendered 
 independent of them? I appeal to yourselves, if 
 this be not the inevitable tendency of such a prin- 
 ciple ? If I believe the Scriptures not only to have 
 been " given by inspiration of God," but to contain 
 a complete revelation of the divine mind and will, 
 and to be the only source of authentic and saving 
 
63 
 
 instruction in divine things, I then value them ac- 
 cordingly ; I feel the necessity of " searching them 
 as for hidden treasures ;" I say of them, "The law 
 of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands oi 
 gold and silver," — " O how love I thy law ! It is 
 my meditation all the day." But if I once admit 
 the conception, that the Scriptures are not to me the 
 only fountain of truth ; that there is another and a 
 higher from which I may draw directly and inde- 
 pendently of them, — even the fountain from which 
 they have themselves been derived ; — that moment, 
 the necessity for the study of them ceases to be felt, 
 and the force of the inducement to it is proportion- 
 ally paralyzed. They become a mere collection of 
 streams, from the same source whence other streams, 
 equally sacred, flow directly to myself. They be- 
 come mere helps to a higher teacher ; and who will 
 choose going to the usher or monitor, when he 
 can have his lessons immediately from the Head 
 Master ? 
 
 But what then, you may perhaps ask, — what will 
 you make of the explicit declaration quoted by Bar- 
 clay from the Apostle John — " Ye need not that any 
 man teach you ? " — I must answer, after the manner 
 of some old divines, in the first place, negatively ; 
 and the negative answer, indeed, should, in such a 
 case, be sufficient. Whatever it does mean, there is 
 one thing which it plainly cannot mean ; and that is 
 f2 
 
64 
 
 the very thing which, to be at all to Barclay's pur- 
 pose, it would require to mean; — it cannot mean that 
 they stood in need of no further instruction : — for if 
 this were the meaning, how could it be made to com- 
 port with the very fact of John's addressing to them 
 the epistle where the words stand ? Why does he 
 write to them? Is it not to " teach and admonish" 
 them ? It cannot, then, mean this. — Neither can it 
 mean, that the knowledge which they already pos- 
 sessed — the knowledge of the facts and doctrines 
 of the Gospel — had come to each and all of them 
 by direct communication from the Spirit of truth, 
 without the intervention of any human teacher. That 
 neither the words quoted, nor those in the same con- 
 text — " Ye have an unction from the Holy One, 
 and ye know all things" — have any such meaning 
 as this, — John himself puts beyond a doubt by 
 expressly affirming the contrary : " That which was 
 from the beginning, which we have heard, which we 
 have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, 
 and our hands have handled, of the word of life — 
 (for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and 
 hear witness, and show unto you that Eternal Life, 
 which was with the Father, and was manifested unto 
 us) — that which we have seen and heard declare we 
 unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us ; 
 and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with 
 his Son Jesus Christ." Chap. i. 1 — 3. — They re- 
 
65 
 
 eeived their knowledge, then, both of the facts and 
 truths of the Gospel, from the testimony, or witness- 
 bearing, of the Apostles : — that which they knew, 
 had been declared unto them by others. — The mean- 
 ing, then, seems to be this. It w r as in connexion with 
 " the truth as it is in Jesus," that they had received 
 the " unction from the Holy One." The truth was 
 imparted to them by the commissioned teachers; and 
 the anointing of the Spirit came along with it, en- 
 lightening their minds to discern its divine excellence, 
 and giving them, in its felt influence upon their 
 hearts, the experimental evidence of its divine origin 
 and authority. " I have not written unto you," says 
 John, " because ye know not the truth, but because yt 
 know it, and that no lie is of the truth." They so knew 
 the truth, spiritually and experimentally, under di- 
 vine teaching, that they might well be proof against 
 the seducing influence of new and false instructors- 
 — the instructors whom he designates by the genera, 
 name of Antichrist. — These teachers came to them 
 with doctrines of their own. But they needed no 
 such instructors. The gospel of the Apostles, Q'om 
 gospel," says Paul) " had come to them, not in word 
 only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and 
 in much assurance :" — having " heard the word of 
 truth, the gospel of their salvation," and " having- 
 believed in Christ" of whom it testified, " they had 
 been sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise." By 
 f 3 
 
66 
 
 this " unction from the Holy One," they " knew the 
 certainty of those things wherein they had been in- 
 structed;" they "had the witness in themselves." 
 To listen to other teachers, was to doubt the testi- 
 mony of God, who had accompanied his own truth 
 with the most unequivocal evidence. So that, in- 
 stead of listening to "those that seduced them," they 
 had good reason to act as John enjoins in his second 
 epistle — " If there come any unto you, and bring 
 not this doctrine," (the " doctrine of Christ" deliv- 
 ered by Apostles,) " receive him not into your house, 
 neither bid him God-speed." There were some who 
 had " gone out from" the communion of Apostles 
 and Christians, and had thus shown that " they were 
 not of them :" — but he was " persuaded better things" 
 of them to whom he wrote — persuaded, that, having 
 the anointing of the Spirit abiding in them, they 
 would not hearken to the counsel that causeth to err 
 from the way of knowledge, but would " continue in 
 the Son and in the Father." — But, make of John's 
 language what you will, it is enough for my present 
 purpose to have shown, that it can neither mean that 
 they had received their knowledge immediately from 
 the Spirit, nor that all farther instructions were su- 
 perfluous ; inasmuch as both of these things stand 
 contradicted by the Apostle himself in the very 
 epistle where the words are found. 
 
 Of the tendency of the doctrine of immediate 
 
67 
 
 revelation, or inward light, to depreciate the Scrip- 
 tures, we have an exemplification, which, to my mind, 
 is very shocking, in the manner in which Barclay 
 speaks of the use made by the Apostle Paul of the 
 Old Testament writings, in his communings with the 
 Jews. He is answering the objection to his doctrine, 
 (the doctrine that the Scriptures are not the primary 
 rule and test of truth) drawn from what is said of the 
 Bereans, that, when Paul preached to them, " they re- 
 ceived the word with all readiness of mind, and search- 
 ed the Scriptures daily whether these things were so." 
 His third reply to the objection is — " If this commen- 
 " dation of the Jewish Bereans might infer that the 
 " Scriptures were the only and principal rule to try 
 " the Apostle's doctrine by, what should become of 
 " the Gentiles ?" — who were not previously, like the 
 Jews, believers in the divine authority of the Old 
 Testament Scriptures ; so that an appeal to these 
 Scriptures could not be supposed to have any weight 
 with them. Now, although the Apostle does not 
 omit this description of evidence even with Gentiles, 
 — for it is to Gentiles he says — " I declare unto you 
 the gospel which I preached unto you — that Christ 
 died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that 
 he was buried, and that he rose again the third day 
 according to the Scriptures ;" — yet I readily grant, 
 he does in general reason differently w T ith Jews 
 and with Gentiles : — with the former, " out of the 
 
68 
 
 Scriptures ;" — with the latter, on principles taught 
 by the light of natural reason and conscience. But 
 what shall we say of the following comparison ? 
 " Now certainly the principal and only rule is not 
 " different ; one to the Jews, and another to the 
 " Gentiles ; but is universal, reaching both ; though 
 " secondary and subordinate rules may be various, 
 " and diversely suited, according as the people they 
 " are used to are stated and circumstantiated : even 
 " so we see that the Apostle to the Athenians used 
 w a testimony of one of their own poets, which he 
 " judged would have credit with them; and no doubt 
 " such testimonies, whose authors they esteemed, had 
 " more weight with them than all the sayings of 
 " Moses and the prophets, whom they neither knew, 
 " nor would have cared for. Now, because the 
 " Apostle used the testimony of a poet to the Athe- 
 " nians, will it therefore follow he made that the 
 " principal or only rule to try his doctrine by? So 
 " neither will it follow, that though he made use of 
 " the Scripture to the Jews, as being a principle al- 
 " ready believed by them, to try his doctrine, that 
 < ; from thence the Scriptures may be accounted the 
 " principal or only rule." * — Is it come to this ! — 
 that Paul's reasoning with the Jews from the Old , 
 Testament Scriptures, no more implies his acknovv- 
 
 * Ibid, page 90. 
 
69 
 
 ledging these writings as the rule or test by which 
 he consented his doctrine should be tried, — than his 
 quoting with approbation a saying of the Athenian 
 Menander implies his acknowledging as such a rule 
 or test the testimony of that heathen poet ! Assur- 
 edly, when Paul " reasoned with the Jews out of the 
 Scriptures" in proof of his two leading positions, — 
 " that the Christ was to suffer and to rise from the 
 dead, and that Jesus whom he preached to them 
 was the Christ," — he proceeded upon the assumption, 
 that if his doctrine did not agree with the typical 
 and prophetic intimations of these Scriptures, it had 
 no title to be received as true, and his unbelieving 
 countrymen were justified in rejecting it. Surely 
 this w r as admitting the Old Testament Scriptures to 
 be a legitimate test of his doctrine. Who questions 
 that? you may say : that which w r e insist on is, their 
 not being the only or the primary test. I answer, if 
 by a test is to be understood merely an evidence of 
 truth, then certainly they were not the only test. 
 There were other proofs of the divinity of Paul's 
 doctrine ; and to them, perhaps, as being more direct 
 and immediate, the epithet of " primary" might even 
 more appropriately be applied. I allude to the mir- 
 acles, by which the divinity of his commission, and 
 the truth of his message, were alike attested. But 
 if by a test is meant a legitimate or authorized stan- 
 dard of comparison, by their conformity or discon- 
 
70 
 
 formity to which other things are to be tried ; then 
 I must insist upon it, that in this sense, the Old Tes- 
 tament Scriptures were both the primary and the 
 only test. What other was there ? The light within, 
 says Barclay, the universal light, — the same to both 
 Jews and Gentiles. But if the inward light was the 
 primary test, how came it that, with the Jews, Paul 
 made his appeal, always to the secondary, and never 
 to the primary ? And with regard to the Gentiles, 
 what is this inward light ? Is it simply reason, or is 
 it the direct illumination of the Spirit, — immediate 
 revelation ? If it be reason, we may well ask, has 
 God indeed constituted the reason of fallen man 
 the standard, the primary standard, of his own 
 truth ! Has not the reason of fallen man, in its ap- 
 plication to the things of God, proved itself, in all 
 ages and in all places, to be foolishness ? Is not the 
 light that is in him darkness? And are we to regard 
 as the divinely sanctioned standard of religious truth, 
 a principle, of which the results, in universal experi- 
 ence, have been little else than multiform and miser- 
 able error ! That the principles of divine revelation 
 are in perfect harmony with sound reason, I more 
 than grant. We can appeal in their behalf to the 
 judgments of men, and say, " Why even of yourselves 
 judge ye not that which is right?" But this is a 
 very different thing from setting up human reason, 
 perverted as it is by depravity, as the standard of the 
 
71 
 
 truth of God. — If, again, the inward light is divine 
 illumination, we have to observe, first, that the as- 
 sumption of it involves a begging of the question. 
 The existence of such illumination independently of 
 the written word, — the existence, that is, of imme- 
 diate revelation in others than those by whom that 
 word was recorded, — is the very point in dispute. 
 No one, surely, will be so pitifully weak as to adduce 
 Paul's reference to the saying of the poet, Menander, 
 as a proof of it ! — We have to observe, secondly, 
 that to make this description of inward light the 
 standard of divine communications, is to make it the 
 standard of itself. You lay claim to immediate 
 revelation, as the privilege of all who live under the 
 new covenant economy. What, then, is the differ- 
 ence between immediate revelation and inward light? 
 If we are to try the former by the latter, what is this 
 but trying it by itself, and making the Spirit's illu- 
 mination in one the test of the Spirit's illumination 
 in another; which amounts to the same thing as hav- 
 ing no test at all ? Every man's own light is his 
 own standard ; and is the standard of the light in 
 others ; and is the standard of the light even in the 
 Holy Scriptures, inasmuch as the Spirit himself is 
 above the external word, and his direct communica- 
 tions are more to be looked to than those which have 
 come to us through the medium of others. And is 
 this to do honour to the Scriptures ? * 
 
72 
 
 That I do not go too far in this last position, — that 
 Quaker principles do in reality, however much Friends 
 may at times disclaim it, place the immediate revela- 
 tion of the Spirit above that which is contained in 
 the written volume of inspiration, — may be made 
 apparent by exemplification in facts, as well as by 
 general reasoning. — The lives of some of your most 
 noted characters, both in England and in America, 
 — the life, for example, of George Fox, and that of 
 Job Scott, — bring before us men, not taking the 
 written word as " the light of their feet and the lamp 
 of their paths," ever searching for and following its 
 directions, — but waiting for the immediate visitations 
 of the Spirit to themselves, listening to his secret 
 voices in their own minds, and even proceeding with 
 confidence on his prophetic intimations to them of 
 the future ! Have the Scriptures, in such cases, the 
 prominence and the deference due to them ? Are 
 they not rather thrown into the back ground ? Do 
 not the auto-biographers appear before us, rather as 
 themselves inspired, and walking in the conscious 
 dignity of such inspiration, than as humbly submit- 
 ting themselves to the guidance of the inspiration of 
 others? — on an equality with Isaiah and Jeremiah, 
 and Peter and Paul, as fellow-partakers with them of 
 the same Spirit of immediate revelation, rather than 
 sitting down at their feet, to receive their instructions 
 as the truly inspired and divinely constituted guides 
 
73 
 
 to truth and duty, — of whom God says, " He that 
 heareth you heareth me," and who could say of them- 
 selves, " We are of God : he who is of God heareth 
 us; he who is not of God heareth not us?" 
 
 Barclay represents the direct manifestation of the 
 Holy Spirit in the mind as more to be depended on 
 than the Scriptures, at any rate as we possess them; 
 and, in order to recommend the more his favourite 
 inward light, he takes very unseemly and mischievous 
 pains to place in the strongest possible point of view r 
 the prejudices, the unfaithfulness, and the consequent 
 false renderings, of translators, as well as the accidental 
 errors, the various readings, and other corruptions of 
 the sacred text. According to him, the direct mani- 
 festation of the Spirit is clearer and more satisfac- 
 tory than truth coming to us through any such me- 
 dium : — " It is through and by the clearness which 
 " that Spirit gives us," he says, " that we are only 
 " best rid of the difficulties that occur to us with re- 
 " gard to the Scriptures." And the instance adduced 
 by him, in illustration and proof of this, is indeed 
 a most extraordinary one : — " The real and undoubt- 
 " ed experience whereof I myself have been a wit- 
 " ness of, with great admiration of the love of God 
 " to his children in these latter days : for I have 
 " known some of my friends, who profess the same 
 " faith with me, faithful servants of the Most High 
 " God, and full of divine knowledge of his truth, as 
 
 G 
 
" it was immediately and inwardly revealed to them 
 " by the Spirit, from a true and living experience, 
 u who not only were ignorant of the Greek and He- 
 " brew, but even some of them could not read their 
 " own vulgar language, who, being pressed by their 
 " adversaries by some citations out of the English 
 " translation, and finding them to disagree with the 
 " manifestation of truth in their own hearts, have 
 ' 6 boldly affirmed the Spirit of God never said so, 
 " and that it was certainly wrong ; for they did not 
 " believe that any of the holy prophets or apostles 
 " had written so ; which, when I, on this account, 
 " seriously examined, I really found to be errors and 
 " corruptions of the translators ; who (as in most 
 -' translations) do not so much give us the gen- 
 " uine signification of the words, as strain thern to 
 " express that which comes nearest to that opinion 
 " and notion they have of truth/'* — It would have 
 been well, had Barclay given us some little infor- 
 mation, what the passages were to which he refers ; 
 that so we might have judged between him and our 
 translators, whom he so unceremoniously criminates. 
 It is not impossible, that we might have thought the 
 straining on the other side, and the translators not so 
 far wrong. At all events, we should have been al- 
 lowed to judge for ourselves. — It is quite conceivable, 
 
 * Apol. page 82. 
 
75 
 
 that a person, who has formed his views of divine 
 truth from extensive and careful examination of the 
 Scriptures themselves, might suspect the correctness 
 with which a particular passage had been translated, 
 on the ground of the sentiment conveyed being at 
 variance with what is usually called the " analogy of 
 faith," and, on examination, find his suspicions well- 
 founded. But this is a case quite different from 
 Barclay's. His object is, to exalt the inward light 
 or immediate revelation, as a privilege superior in 
 excellence to the possession of the written word, in 
 any translation, or even in the original text. I say, 
 even in the original text ; for of it there have been 
 corruptions, some of them more and some of them 
 less important, and various readings, contending for 
 the preference : — and indeed, it is only by translation 
 that the meaning of the text, however immaculate it 
 be supposed, can be known, — it being sufficiently 
 manifest, that the man w r ho does not follow the trans- 
 lation of another, must follow his own. — By thus 
 exalting immediate revelation at the expense of the 
 written word, the latter is proportionally depreciated, 
 and its certainty and authority alike impaired. If 
 indeed it be so, that we are surer of truth by heark- 
 ening to the voice of the Spirit speaking immediately 
 to ourselves, than by having recourse to those re- 
 cords of inspiration, where there may be errors both 
 in the transcription and translation ; — if it be so, that 
 g2 
 
76 
 
 the danger of mistaking the reality of communica- 
 tions from the Spirit to ourselves is smaller than the 
 danger of mistaking the meaning of the recorded 
 communications to others ; — what becomes of the 
 inducement to study the Scriptures ? They cannot 
 fail to be little thought of, and little read and investi- 
 gated, in proportion as men come to think they have 
 something else that is clearer and better, — something 
 that qualifies them for detecting and rectifying the 
 errors of the written record, instead of requiring 
 them to come to that record for the detection and 
 rectification of their own ! 
 
 This is certainly a novel principle of Biblical cri- 
 ticism ; and, were it not for its rank mysticism, and 
 its seriously mischievous tendency, one might be 
 disposed to make a little merry with it, I refrain, 
 however. Whether there be less danger of error in 
 hearkening to the Spirit in ourselves, than in heark- 
 ening to the Spirit through the medium of the writ- 
 ten record, is a question which few will have much 
 hesitation in answering, who are at all duly aware of 
 the unnumbered sources of self-delusion in the human 
 mind. The length to which the adoption of Bar- 
 clay's principle may carry a man, is afFectingly il- 
 lustrated in the case mentioned by Mr Newton in 
 his " Remonstrance to the Society of Friends." 
 Before mentioning it, it is necessary to premise, that 
 Barclay applies his principle, not merely to the im- 
 
77 
 
 mediate manifestation of the Spirit in spiritual men, 
 or genuine believers in Christ, but to that universal 
 light within, which Friends hold to be enjoyed by 
 all men, in virtue of Christ's mediation. — " Last 
 year," says Mr Newton, " while travelling in Ire- 
 " land, I met with a physician, w T ho had been educated 
 " as a Friend, and professed entire coincidence with 
 " the doctrines of Barclay, though he believed not in 
 " the Lamb slain for sin. When the concluding 
 " verses of the 9th of Hebrews were quoted (' with- 
 " out shedding of blood is no remission') he refused 
 u to receive it as Scripture, because it did not meet 
 " the witness of the Spirit in his own mind ; and he 
 '•' then instanced other passages which he rejected on 
 " the same principle. Thus an unregenerate man, 
 " taught by Barclay to believe that God dwelt in 
 " him, was determining what he would not receive 
 " as Scripture, and using the very principle of Bar- 
 " clay in defending the rejection of the blood of the 
 " covenant." * — You may allege, that this is the abuse 
 of the principle ; but to me it seems to be no more 
 than its legitimate application. This man had the 
 same right to follow " the witness of the Spirit in 
 his own mind," that the others had, whose conduct 
 Barclay sanctions and commends, regarding its result 
 with admiration and gratitude, as a signal exemplifi- 
 
 * Remonstrance, &c. a page 46, Note. 
 g3 
 
78 
 
 cation of " the love of God to his children in these 
 latter days." If the principle did indeed chance in 
 the one case to lead right, (for which, however, we 
 have no evidence but Barclay's opinion ;) it chanced, 
 in the other, to lead wrong. And it is manifestly a 
 principle, which, by leaving truth to be determined 
 by the impressions of every man's own mind, and 
 those impressions subject to the illusive influence of 
 a heart " deceitful above all things," is not at least 
 less likely to lead wrong than to lead right. Whether 
 it has not led even Mr Barclay himself to principles 
 at variance with those taught by the Apostles of 
 Christ, — to principles that go far to subvert the Gos- 
 pel, we may hereafter have occasion to examine. I 
 now speak only of the tendency of the principle; and 
 this, I conceive to be, both to draw away the thoughts 
 from the Scriptures to what is believed to be a higher 
 authority, and to leave that authority dependant on 
 the fancied spiritual illumination of every man's own 
 mind. 
 
 It will not avail you to say, in answer to this, that 
 there are differences of sentiment among those who 
 profess to defer to the Scriptures themselves as the 
 primary and only test. We grant it ; we deplore it. 
 But there is this difference between you and us; and 
 it is a most important one, in as far as the respect 
 due to the Scriptures is concerned, — that no protes- 
 tant interpreters regard their expositions of Scripture 
 
79 
 
 as possessing any pretension to inspired authority ; 
 they all hold that authority to lie solely in the in- 
 spired writings themselves ; and this principle binds 
 them to one point — the ascertaining of the real im- 
 port of those writings. This import alone, when 
 duly ascertained, they regard as of divine obligation. 
 But you, on the contrary, pretend to a source of in- 
 formation and direction superior to what you are 
 accustomed to call — may I not say disparagingly ? 
 ■ — the mere external rule : — and, while this necessa- 
 rily leads to the practical depreciation of that rule, 
 it exposes you to two sources of error instead of one ; 
 the first being the liableness, common to you with 
 others, to misapprehension of the lessons of Scrip- 
 ture, when you do have recourse to it, — and the sec- 
 ond, the liableness, peculiar to Friends, to self-decep- 
 tion and mistake, as to the reality of the Spirit's 
 intimations to yourselves. I am well aware, (it 
 would be impiety to question it,) that the blessed 
 God, having immediate access to the human mind, 
 can impart to any man, whensoever he pleases, the 
 absolute assurance that a particular communication 
 comes from Him. That he did this, in many in- 
 stances, to prophets and apostles, independently of 
 the evidence of external signs, I freely grant. Even 
 by them, however, such signs were not unfrequently 
 sought for their own fuller satisfaction ; and for the 
 
80 
 
 satisfaction of others they were indispensable : — 
 which leads me to observe— 
 
 4. That the modern revelations of Quakerism, even 
 on the assumption of their being genuine, and of 
 their being certified to the mind of the individual with 
 divine assurance (an assumption, however, which 
 would be a begging of the question at issue, — the 
 question, namely, whether such revelations, indepen- 
 dent of what is already recorded in the Scriptures, 
 be still made) — yet can be of avail, so far as their 
 authority is concerned, and the consequent obligation 
 they impose, to him only who receives them. How 
 are they to avail for others ? 
 
 But, the present letter having been more than suffi- 
 ciently extended, I shall defer the consideration of this 
 question, along with remarks on some other topics 
 connected with the all-important subject of the au- 
 thority and completeness of the Scriptures, to form 
 the contents of my next, and subscribe myself again, 
 Yours very respectfully, 
 
 R. W. 
 
LETTER III. 
 
 THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED. 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 In the conclusion of my last letter, I 
 had just announced a fourth general observation, in 
 regard to the standard of religious truth and duty. 
 I repeat the terms in which it was then stated, and 
 proceed with the consideration of it : — " That the 
 " modern revelations of Quakerism, even on the as- 
 i( sumption of their being genuine, and of their be- 
 " ing certified to the mind of the individual with 
 " divine assurance, — yet can be of avail, so far as 
 " their authority is concerned, and the consequent 
 " obligation they impose, to him only ivho receives 
 "them. How are they to avail for others?" — The 
 question is one of essential moment. — How are they 
 attested ? Whatever assurance inspired men had of 
 old, that " the Divinity stirred within them," and 
 that the intimations to their minds were from Him, 
 — this assurance was exclusively their own. They 
 could not convey it to other minds. It was of too 
 peculiar a nature, to be known otherwise than by 
 
82 
 
 experience. Hence they required credentials of 
 their commission, and of the divine authority of 
 their message. They performed miracles ; they de- 
 livered predictions. If any man, therefore, now 
 assures us of his being " moved by the Holy Spirit," 
 like the " holy men of God" by whom the divine 
 oracles were delivered of old, we are fully entitled to 
 demand his credentials ; to say to him, " What sign 
 showest thou, that we may see it and believe thee ?" 
 In what other way is the revelation given to one man 
 to have authority with another? Must we, in all 
 cases, take it upon trust ; and, whenever a man — let 
 the excellence of his character be what it may — is 
 pleased to assure us that " the Spirit moveth him" 
 to make any particular communication, must we ac- 
 cept it simply on his word, and defer to him as an 
 inspired authority ? — or must every individual wait 
 for the Spirit's intimations to himself? I certainly 
 feel myself, not merely warranted, but imperatively 
 bound, before accepting as divine the lessons or the 
 commands, the counsels, the consolations, or the ad- 
 monitions, of another, to ask satisfactory evidence of 
 his speaking from God. The correspondence be- 
 tween the witness of the Spirit in him, and the wit- 
 ness of the Spirit in me, is not sufficient ; for both 
 may be a delusion : — and if they should differ, which 
 am I to follow ? 
 
 Allow me, in this connexion, a few remarks on the 
 
83 
 
 extent of fallacy and contradiction into which the 
 admission of a single false principle may lead. I take 
 my exemplification from the same eminent individual, 
 Barclay himself. He writes clearly and ably, when 
 he happens upon right ground ; but, on the subject 
 before us, and on some others, he is betrayed by the 
 exigencies of a false principle, into the most extraor- 
 dinary inconsistencies. — In the first place, for exam- 
 ple, he confounds the thing believed and the mode of 
 its communication to the mind. — He lays down as a 
 maxim what no Christian of any intelligence will 
 dispute, that the object of the faith of the saints has, 
 in all ages, been the same. But, his creed requiring 
 that the object of faith be something inward^ — the 
 spiritual mystical Saviour, the Christ within, — he is 
 led by this into the strange confusion to which I have 
 just adverted. As a specimen of this confusion, of 
 which it were not difficult to produce many, observe 
 what he says, when speaking of the examples of faith 
 enumerated in the eleventh chapter of the epistle to 
 the Hebrews : — " And as to the other part or conse- 
 " quence of the antecedent, to wit, that the object is 
 " one where the faith is one, the apostle also proveth 
 " it in the fore-cited chapter, where he makes all the 
 " worthies of old examples to us. Now, wherein are 
 " they imitable, but because they believed in God ? 
 " And what was the object of their faith, but inward 
 f 6 and immediate revelation, as we have before proved? 
 
84 
 
 " Their example can be nowise applicable to us, un- 
 " less we believe in God as they did ; that is, by the 
 " same object." — Confusion of ideas seems here to 
 have led to confusion of terms. Inward and imme- 
 diate revelation, was not surely the object of their 
 faith, or the thing believed ; it was no more than the 
 mode of its communication to the mind. When it is 
 said " Their example can be no w r ays applicable to 
 " us, unless we believe in God as they did ; that is, 
 " by the same object ; " the confusion of terms is sur- 
 prising. If the words have any meaning at all, they 
 must mean, that we cannot be said to believe the 
 same thing, unless it be communicated to us in the 
 same way ; that the object of our faith cannot be the 
 same, unless the mode of communication be the same; 
 that that which was communicated to prophets and 
 apostles by direct inspiration, must also be commu- 
 nicated to us by direct inspiration, else we cannot be 
 said to have the same faith with them, — to believe 
 the same thing ! — " If the object of faith were not 
 " one and the same both to us and to them, then it 
 " would follow that we were to know God some other 
 " way than by the Spirit ! " — that is, (is it not?) un- 
 less God is known in the same way, it cannot be the 
 same God that is known : — unless faith in God arise, 
 in every case, from immediate inspiration, it cannot 
 be the same God that is the object of it : — unless all 
 believers are, in the same sense as prophets and 
 
85 
 
 apostles, inspired men, there are no believers ! — That 
 I am not doing Barclay injustice, or stretching his 
 language beyond its legitimate meaning, in consider- 
 ing him, when he speaks of knowing God only by 
 the Spirit, as meaning, not the mere communication 
 of the spiritual discernment of truth already reveal- 
 ed, but the immediate revelation of it to the mind, 
 is apparent from the fact of his applying freely 
 to all believers the promises which Jesus made to 
 those commissioned ambassadors who were to con- 
 vey, with accredited authority, his doctrines and 
 commandments to men. Here, we apprehend, re- 
 spected friends, lies one leading mistake amongst 
 you. I make it my second particular, in illustration 
 of Barclay's confusion of ideas arising from his prime 
 fallacy. 
 
 He confounds, I say, in the second place, direct 
 and proper inspiration with the ordinary illuminations 
 of the Spirit of God. Jesus says to his apostles, 
 John xvi. 12 — 15. " I have yet many things to say 
 unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit 
 when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide 
 you into all truth : for he shall not speak of himself; 
 but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak : 
 and he will show you things to come. He shall glo- 
 rify me : for he shall receive of mine, and shall show 
 it unto you. All things that the Father hath are 
 mine : therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, 
 
 H 
 
86 
 
 and shall show it unto you." — On the ground of such 
 assurances it is, that, for the full revelation of the 
 mind and will of the Lord, we look to those writings 
 of his apostles which were given to the world subse- 
 quently to the period when they obtained " the pro- 
 mise of the Father," the gift of the Spirit, for which 
 they had been commanded to wait ; and that we 
 demonstrate the unreasonableness of Socinians, in 
 undervaluing the apostolic epistles, which were the 
 results of their full inspiration. Yet by Barclay, such 
 promises, instead of being appropriated to the apos- 
 tles, are interpreted as belonging, indiscriminately, to 
 all believers. I am not disposed to question the pro- 
 priety of so interpreting some of the things contain- 
 ed in the valedictory address of the Saviour from 
 which the preceding verses are quoted, respecting the 
 mission and work of the Spirit. What is said, for 
 example, of his " convincing the world of sin, of 
 righteousness, and of judgment," relates to his opera- 
 tion in the conversion of men by means of the min- 
 istry of those whom he was, at the same time, to 
 endow for that ministry by his plenary inspiration ; 
 and what is subsequently said of his agency as the 
 paraclete, — the comforter, or monitor, of his people, 
 though primarily meant for the encouragement of the 
 servants of the Lord, in sustaining the trials and 
 conflicting with the difficulties of their work, it would 
 yet be as hypercritical as it would be disheartening, 
 
87 
 
 to restrict to them alone. But to infer from this, 
 that the whole of what is promised to the apostles is 
 equally promised to all the followers of Christ, is to 
 run far and wildly to the opposite extreme. When 
 Jesus promises his Spirit, to supply to them the de- 
 ficiency of his own present instructions, — to " lead 
 them into all truth," — and to " bring all things to 
 their remembrance, whatsoever he had said unto 
 them;" he gives them, by the latter of these expres- 
 sions, the assurance of so full and perfect a recollec- 
 tion of the doings and sayings of their Master, as 
 should enable them to record them for mankind, 
 without the possibility of inaccuracy or mistake; and 
 by the former, the still further assurance of so full a 
 discovery to their minds of the entire system of evan- 
 gelical truth, as should fit them for being the infalli- 
 ble teachers of that truth to the world. — Is this, then, 
 a promise, I ask you, to be interpreted as the com- 
 mon privilege of believers ? — nay, your system, I 
 presume, if consistent witli itself, would warrant 
 my extending the question still more widely, and 
 saying — of believers and unbelievers; — for your 
 universal light, which is identified by you with the 
 promised illumination of the Spirit, is not of course 
 confined to the believing followers of Christ, but 
 common to them, as the result of his mediation, with 
 mankind at large ! — the Christ ivithin (which, in 
 your peculiar phraseology, is the same with the Holy 
 h 2 
 
88 
 
 Spirit) " enlightening every man that cometh into 
 the world." — If the promise of being " led into all 
 truth" — that is, directly and independently of all 
 human means, were to be interpreted as extending 
 to all even of the disciples of Jesus, would not such 
 interpretation go far to supersede the necessity of the 
 Scriptures as the source of instruction, and so (as 
 stated in my last letter) to annihilate, or at least very 
 greatly to diminish, the inducement to the study of 
 them ? But I must go a step further. I ask you 
 another question. You will not deny, that, in order 
 to any one's being a disciple of Jesus, he must know 
 the doctrines of Jesus ; and, as these doctrines are 
 inseparably associated with certain facts, he must 
 know those facts,- — the facts of the gospel history. 
 Now, the question I have to ask is simply this— Are 
 you aware of any instances, or even of one single 
 instance, in which these facts have come to be known 
 by direct communication to the mind from the Spirit 
 of God, independently of any acquaintance with the 
 Scripture record itself, or of any information imparted 
 by those who had derived their knowledge from it ? — 
 There is, I apprehend, on this subject, a good deal 
 amongst you of a loose and indefinite phraseology, 
 which, when examined, means nothing ; when put 
 into the crucible, and exposed to the furnace of cri- 
 ticism, evaporates, and leaves no residuum. You 
 speak of it as the common privilege of God's people. 
 
89 
 
 under the new covenant dispensation, that they are 
 directly " led by the Spirit into all truth," that they 
 " have an unction from the Holy One, and know all 
 things," that " they need not any man to teach them." 
 But I repeat and press the question, Has the know- 
 ledge of gospel facts, on which gospel doctrines are 
 founded, ever been imparted to any mind, since the 
 time when " the vision and the prophecy were seal- 
 ed up" in Patmos, without the instrumental means 
 (directly or indirectly employed) of the written 
 record ? If you say, that a man may be a disciple 
 of Christ, by having the Christ within, independently 
 of all knowledge of the Christ without, — which would 
 amount to the same thing with saying, that he may 
 be " led into all truth," and " know all things," in- 
 dependently of any acquaintance with the funda- 
 mental facts of the evangelical history, — I can only 
 answer, in the words of Sterne, <; That I deny ;" and 
 I am supported in the denial of it by the entire 
 . tenor of the New Testament. Such an assertion, 
 indeed, would carry us beyond the limits of the 
 written record, — beyond the bounds of reason and 
 common sense, — and land us in the region of spirit- 
 ual meteorology and mysticism, — the plenum in va- 
 cuo, the fulness of nothing, — where all is lightness 
 and vertigo, and there is no rest for the sole of the 
 foot. When Paul tells me, that he " determined not 
 to know any thing/' in his preaching, " save Jesus 
 h3 
 
90 
 
 Christ, and him crucified ;" — when he exhibits the 
 substance of the gospel preached by him as consist- 
 ing in the facts that " Christ died for our sins ac- 
 cording to the Scriptures, that he was buried, and 
 that he rose again the third day according to the 
 Scriptures ;" I have something palpable, of which 
 my mind has a distinct and firm apprehension. But 
 when I am told of the " Lamb slain " meaning the 
 " light or principle of life" in man " resisted and 
 grieved;" — of the Christ within and his " spiritual 
 flesh and blood ;" — of this flesh and blood being " the 
 same as the light that enlighteneth every man ;" — of 
 " the outward Lamb" being but a type, or " showing 
 forth of the inward Lamb ;" in a word, as Mr New- 
 ton expresses it, of " inward mediation, inward atone- 
 ment, inward spiritual blood ;" — when from the Christ 
 to whom the gospel bears testimony, the Christ 
 born in Bethlehem, agonizing in Gethsemane, and 
 dying on Calvary, as the atonement for the sins of the 
 world, my attention is thus drawn to an undefinable 
 sentimental something within myself, — not an ex- 
 ercise of mind relative to this external Saviour, by 
 which, through the influence of the Spirit, I become 
 interested in the merits of his obedience and sacri- 
 fice, — but something that, under the various designa- 
 tions of spirit within, light within, Christ within, 
 principle of life, inward spiritual blood, &c. &c. is 
 my Saviour, my true and only Saviour, which the 
 
91 
 
 outward Christ only represented and shadowed forth ; 
 — I feel that I am " moved away from the hope of 
 the gospel," — that which is the ground of my hope 
 not being the very Christ that suffered on the cross, 
 and put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, but a 
 principle within, of which his name only furnishes 
 one of the designations : — " Christ in you the hope 
 of glory" being interpreted, not of Christ the incar- 
 nate Son of God, the Word made flesh, " dwelling 
 in the heart by faith" as the object of that heart's 
 devoted love, which is the plain and simple meaning 
 of the apostle's words, — but of this abstract impal- 
 pable Christ within ; of which the very variety of 
 its designations shows how confused is the concep- 
 tion, and of which, the more is said to explain and 
 define it, that conception becomes the more obscure, 
 shadowy, and shapeless. — But I am forgetting myself; 
 — I must not diverge further from the point I was 
 discussing — namely, that by Barclay and others, 
 proper inspiration is confounded with the ordinary 
 illumination of the Spirit. The former was promised 
 by Christ to his apostles ; and the promise was ful- 
 filled on the memorable day of Pentecost. The very 
 terms of the promise, it might be farther observed, 
 appropriate it to them ; " bringing all things to their 
 remembrance' applying with no propriety to any 
 others than to those who had been the attendants on 
 his ministry " all the while that he went in and out 
 
92 
 
 amongst them," — who had " seen, and heard, and 
 looked upon, and handled" him. — With regard to 
 the latter, I would only say farther, that the Christ 
 who is the object of saving knowledge and faith, is 
 the Christ revealed in the gospel testimony, the Jesus 
 of Nazareth, of whose birth, and life, and doctrines, 
 and miracles, and sufferings, and death, and resurrec- 
 tion, and ascension to glory, the inspired apostles 
 bear witness ; — and that it is neither by the Spirit 
 independently of the word that this Christ is sav- 
 ingly known, nor by the word independently of the 
 Spirit. It is by both ; by the Word as the instru- 
 mental means, by the Spirit as the efficient agent. 
 In the word, the person, character, and work of Christ 
 are the subject of inspired testimony ; by the Spirit, 
 the moral blindness of the sinner to the glories of his 
 person, the beauties of his character, and the divine 
 wonders of his work, is, by an operation of which 
 the nature and mode are to us inscrutable, graciously 
 removed ; and, the instant this " spiritual discern- 
 ment" is imparted, he receives Christ, and Christ is 
 " in him, the hope of glory." Thus Christ and the 
 Spirit have their distinct and proper places. By you 
 they are confounded and identified ; the light within 
 being used convertibly with both the Spirit within 
 and the Christ within. Thus too inspiration and 
 spiritual illumination are duly distinguished ; the 
 former being the direct and infallible revelation of 
 
93 
 
 truth to the mind, — the latter, the discernment by the 
 mind of the divine excellence and suitableness of the 
 truth so revealed. 
 
 Under Proposition II., at the close of Section IX. , 
 Barclay says : — " What is proper in this place to be 
 " proved is, that Christians now are to be led in- 
 " wardly and immediately by the Spirit of God, even 
 " in the same manner (though it befall not many to 
 <f be led in the same measure) as the saints were of 
 "■old." — On the first reading of this sentence, I mar- 
 velled greatly. Understanding by the saints of old, 
 those who lived under the former dispensation, it 
 seemed very strange, and very inconsistent, to repre- 
 sent a dispensation, of which the characteristic dis- 
 tinction is its being (i the ministration of the Spirit," 
 as more restricted than the former in the abundance 
 of spiritual influence ; so that the possession of that 
 influence in a superior measure should be found in 
 cases of rare exception only to the average ratio. 
 On looking forward, however, I perceived, from the 
 passages of Scripture quoted in proof, — which are 
 principally the promises already referred to in the 
 gospel by John, and certain promises of the Spirit 
 given by the Old Testament prophets in their antici- 
 pations of gospel days, — that by the " saints of old," 
 when contrasted with saints now, he means rather 
 those who lived in " the beginning of the gospel;" 
 and the restriction of the immediate communications 
 
94 
 
 of the Spirit in more modern times, he must consider 
 as arising, not from any limitation in the promises 
 themselves, but from the prevailing want of faith in 
 them among professed believers. But then, when he 
 speaks of " Christians now being led inwardly and 
 immediately by the Spirit of God, in the same man- 
 ner as the saints of old," he takes it for granted that 
 it was the universal privilege of the " saints of old" 
 to be led thus " inwardly and immediately " by the 
 Spirit. The question, then, comes to be, what does 
 he mean by this "inward and immediate" leading? 
 — and, from the entire tenor of his proofs and illus- 
 trations, it is manifest that he means the same kind 
 of direct inspiration which was bestowed upon the 
 apostles and others, to qualify them as the infallible 
 messengers of truth to mankind. It is no wonder, 
 that, with this conception of divine influence, he 
 should represent an equal measure of it as now-a- 
 days a rarity ! — limited, we may presume, to the 
 Friends, who believe in it and look for it, and even 
 amongst them, presenting itself only occasionally in 
 instances of distinguished faith ! But we distinctly 
 deny that this immediate communication of divine 
 truth to the mind, independently of the intervention 
 of human teaching, roas the common privilege of the 
 saints of old, any more than it is of the saints now. 
 We conceive that it was from those " holy men of 
 God who spoke and wrote as they were moved by 
 
95 
 
 the Holy Ghost." that the great general body of 
 believers received their knowledge ; — while, at the 
 same time, this knowledge, though imparted by their 
 instrumentality, was discerned and received under 
 the illumination of the Spirit of God. This we 
 take to be the plain testimony of the inspired 
 writers themselves ; in proof of which passages from 
 their writings might be multiplied. A few must 
 suffice. — To the Corinthians he says — " Who, then, 
 is Paul, and who is A polios, but ministers, by whom 
 ye believed, even as God gave to every man ?" I 
 Cor. iii. 5. Paul had come to Corinth, " declaring 
 unto them the testimony of God;" the testimony, 
 namely, concerning " Jesus Christ, and him cruci- 
 fied:" chap. ii. 1, 2. This testimony, communicated 
 to them by his instrumentality, they had believed. 
 It was he who taught them " the things of the Spirit 
 of God;" while, at the same time, it was by a higher 
 teaching than his, even by the accompanying illumi- 
 nation of the Holy Spirit himself, that they " spiritu- 
 ally discerned" their truth and excellence, and re- 
 ceived them, as no longer " foolishness," but " the 
 wisdom of God:" chap. ii. 14. — " When ye received 
 the word of God," says he to the believers at Thes- 
 salonica, " which ye heard of us, ye received it not 
 as the word of man, but, as it is in truth, the word 
 of God, which effectually worketh also in you that 
 believe." 1 Thess. ii. 13. — To the Galatians — 
 
96 
 
 " Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach unto 
 you any other gospel than that which we have preach- 
 ed unto you, let him be accursed : — as I said before, 
 so say I now again, if any man preach unto you any 
 other gospel than that ye have received, let him be 
 accursed." Gal. i. 8, 9. They received it, then, not 
 by any direct revelation, but by the preaching of this 
 commissioned and accredited ambassador. — To the 
 Corinthians again — " I declare unto you the gos- 
 pel which I preached unto you, which also ye have 
 received, and wherein ye stand : by the w r hich also 
 ye are saved, if ye hold fast what I preached unto 
 you, unless ye have believed in vain." 1 Cor. xv. 1, 
 2, — The style of other apostles is the same. " That 
 which was from the beginning, which we have heard, 
 which we have seen with our eyes, which we have 
 looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the 
 Word of Life : — that which we have seen and heard 
 declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship 
 with us ; and truly our fellowship is with the Father, 
 and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things 
 write we unto you, that your joy may be full. This, 
 then, is the message which we have heard of him, and 
 declare unto you, that God is Light, and in Him is 
 no darkness at all." 1 John i. 1, 3 — 5. And this 
 style, which pervades their writings, is in full accord- 
 ance with the terms of their commission from their 
 divine Master, by which they were constituted the 
 
97 
 
 authoritative teachers of mankind, — his witnesses^ 
 whom he was to accompany with satisfactory cre- 
 dentials, and so to sanction their testimony : — " Then 
 opened he their understandings, that they might un- 
 derstand the Scriptures ; and said unto them, Thus 
 it is written, and thus it behoved the Christ to sur- 
 fer, and to rise from the dead the third day ; and that 
 repentance and remission of sins should be preached 
 in his name, among all nations, beginning at Jerusa- 
 lem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And 
 behold I send the promise of my Father upon you ; 
 but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be 
 endued with power from on high." Luke xxiv. 45 — 
 49. 
 
 This view of the divine procedure makes all suffi- 
 ciently plain. There were inspired men, to whom 
 the truth was communicated by direct revelation. 
 They were commissioned to be the instructors of 
 others, — the medium of communication to the rest 
 of mankind ; and their commission was attested by 
 adequate credentials. At the same time, so hostile 
 was the natural mind to the reception of the message 
 they brought, that the agency of the divine Spirit 
 was necessary to its being discerned by any in its 
 truth and excellence, and received in the love of it 
 And so the case remains. They are still his witnesses. 
 Their inspired writings are the same in authority with 
 what was uttered by their living voice. By these, 
 i 
 
98 
 
 " they, being dead, yet speak ; " and the Spirit still 
 makes the truth which they have there recorded " the 
 power of God unto salvation. " — The language of 
 Barclay, quoted above, implies that, " though it be- 
 fall not many," yet it does befall some, to be " led 
 inwardly and immediately by the Spirit of God," 
 not only " in the same manner" but even " in the 
 same measure^ with the " saints of old :" — that is, 
 that there are still a few to be found, however rare, 
 who enjoy immediate revelation, in the same degree 
 as the apostles ; for he quotes the promise to the 
 apostles in proof of it, about their being " led into 
 all truth !" And, although he does not affirm that 
 there are many who have inspiration in the same 
 measure, he does affirm, that not only many but all 
 believers, under the new economy, have it in the 
 same manner or kind. This, I repeat, arises from 
 confounding the extraordinary with the ordinary 
 operations of the Spirit. The truth is, that none 
 now have either the same measure or the same kind 
 of inspiration ; inspiration, properly so called, having 
 ceased, when the canon of revealed truth was com- 
 pleted in the Scriptures. All have the same amount 
 of privilege, in having the full discovery of the Di- 
 vine Mind in this completed canon ; while, in regard 
 to the enlightening, sanctifying, gladdening, direct- 
 ing, and strengthening influences of the Spirit, the 
 command to all is, " Ask, and ye shall receive." 
 
99 
 
 I have to notice* thirdly, that Mr Barclay greatly 
 misapprehends, not to say misrepresents, the senti- 
 ments of those whom he opposes. — Thus, in speaking 
 of the sameness of the object of the saints' faith in 
 every age, he writes : — " Such as deny this proposi- 
 " tion now-a-days use here a distinction, granting 
 " that God is to be known by his Spirit, but again 
 " denying that it is immediate or inward, but in and 
 " by the Scriptures; in which the mind of the Spirit 
 " (as they say) being fully and amply expressed, we 
 " are thereby to know God, and be led in all things." * 
 — Now the words " immediate or inward" are mis- 
 leading. The two terms are not synonymous. To 
 deny that spiritual influence is immediate, and to 
 deny that it is inward, are not the same thing. Who 
 amongst us denies the latter? There have been 
 some, I am aware, who held the sentiment, and there 
 are some who hold it still, that the sole agency of the 
 Spirit consists in the inspiration by which the Scrip- 
 tures were given ; and that those Scriptures now 
 operate of themselves, independently of any accom- 
 panying influence. But this is not the view held by 
 any who pass under the common designation of evan- 
 gelical. They are far from maintaining that the 
 operation of the word and the operation of the Spirit 
 are one and the same, or (for to this it amounts) that 
 
 * Apol. page 39. 
 
 i 2 
 
100 
 
 there is no operation of the Spirit at all, but only of 
 the word which he has dictated. We hold that there 
 is an operation of the Spirit ; an inward operation ; 
 an operation on the mind. But we hold, at the same 
 time, that this operation is with or by the truth, 
 agreeably to the explicit testimonies of inspired 
 apostles : — James i. 18, "Of his own will begat he 
 us, by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of 
 first-fruits of his creatures:'* — 1 Pet. i. 23, " Being 
 born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorrup- 
 tible, by the viord of God, which liveth and abideth 
 for ever : — And this is the word, which by the gos- 
 pel is preached unto you." — And the same word con- 
 tinues, under the influence of the same Spirit, the 
 instrumental means of progressive sanctification : — 
 " When ye received the word of God which ye heard 
 of us, ye received it not as the word of man, but, as 
 it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually 
 worketh also in you that believe :" — " He that is 
 born of God doth not commit sin ; for his seed re- 
 maineth in him" — (that is, the incorruptible seed of 
 the word) — " and he cannot sin, because he is born 
 of God." 1 Thess. ii. 13. 1 John iii. 9. — In as far, 
 however, as the operation of the Spirit is inward, 
 there is a sense in which it is also immediate : — that 
 is, it is not an operation upon the truth ; for of this 
 it is impossible to form any conception whatever : — 
 it is an operation upon the mind, when the truth is> 
 
101 
 
 or has been, presented to it, — an operation, of which 
 the mode is beyond our distinct apprehension, John 
 iii. 8. but the reality of which is evinced in its re- 
 sults. When we deny it to be, in the Quaker sense, 
 immediate, we mean that it does not consist in any 
 direct communication of truth to the mind, independ- 
 ently of the existing revelation in the Holy Scriptures; 
 but only in such a removal of the mind's natural 
 blindness (a blindness arising from moral causes) as 
 imparts a spiritual discernment of the excellence, and 
 suitableness, and glory of the truth there revealed. 
 It is immediate, as being upon the mind ; it is me- 
 diate, as being by the truth. 
 
 A fourth and most glaring exemplification of the 
 confusion arising from the adoption of a fallacious 
 principle, is, Mr Barclay's confounding the truth of 
 what God reveals with the reality of the revelation. 
 No two things, surely, can be more distinct than 
 these: yet mark how he writes, when he is proceeding 
 to answer objections to the second part of his second 
 proposition. — In that proposition he had affirmed, 
 in regard to the " divine revelation, " or inward illu- 
 mination," for which he contends, its independence of 
 any a more noble or certain rule and touchstone," 
 whether it be " the outward testimony of the Scrip- 
 " tures, or the natural reason of man ;" asserting it 
 to be as " evident and clear of itself," and as assur- 
 edly " forcing by its own evidence and clearness, the 
 i3 
 
102 
 
 " well-disposed understanding to assent, irresistibly 
 " moving the same thereunto, even as the common 
 " principles of natural truths do move and incline the 
 "mind to a natural assent: as, that the whole is 
 " greater than its part ; that two contradictories can- 
 " not be both true nor both false/'* — Now, I have 
 already asked — even on the supposed admission of 
 the confidence being legitimate that is placed in this 
 immediate revelation by those who are themselves 
 the subjects of it, what is it to others? Are others 
 to trust to it, without any credentials produced on the 
 part of those who pretend to it? Mr Barclay seems 
 to have felt the fairness and the force of this objec- 
 tion, and even, (notwithstanding the strong terms 
 used by him in his proposition) of the objection taken 
 from the possible uncertainty to the very person him- 
 self, of the reality of the communication : — " The 
 most usual objection,'' says he, " is, that these reve- 
 " lations are uncertain* — But this bespeaketh much 
 " ignorance in the opposers : for we distinguish be- 
 " tween the thesis and the hypothesis, — that is, be- 
 " tween the proposition and supposition. For it is 
 " one thing to affirm, that the true and undoubted 
 " revelation of God^s will is certain and infallible ; 
 " and another thing to affirm that this or that parti- 
 " cular person or people is led infallibly by this reve- 
 
 * Apol. page 19. 
 
103 
 
 " lation in what they speak or write, because they 
 " affirm themselves to be led by the inward and im- 
 " mediate revelation of the Spirit. The first only is 
 u asserted by us ; the latter may be called in ques- 
 " tion. The question is not, who are or are not so 
 " led ? — but whether all ought not or may not be so 
 "led?"* 
 
 11 The first only is asserted by us" What is it ? 
 " That the true and undoubted revelation of God's 
 " Spirit is certain and infallible ! " And is this really 
 what Mr B. and his friends assert? — this all that they 
 assert? this truism, — which, it may be presumed, 
 there never existed a creature possessing reason, on 
 earth or in the universe, that could question? — 
 Surely you must at once be sensible of this extraor- 
 dinary fallacy. The point in question between us 
 has no relation to the infallible certainty of what 
 God reveals, but solely to the reality of the revela- 
 tion. If this be ascertained, there can be no doubt 
 about the other. — It is here admitted by Barclay, 
 that a man may " affirm himself to be led by the 
 inward and immediate revelation of the Spirit," and 
 yet that his authority may be w called in question," 
 — doubted, that is, and disbelieved : — which amounts 
 to the same thing as admitting that the man himself 
 may be deceived! The query, therefore, comes 
 
 * Apol. page 53. 
 
104 
 
 back upon us, What is the test ? Are the immediate 
 suggestions professedly received by one man, to be 
 judged of by the immediate suggestions professedly re- 
 ceived by another? Which have the claim to prefer- 
 ence ? One man is as much entitled to dispute the 
 alleged revelations of another, as the other can be 
 to dispute his. Is there no determinate common 
 standard for both? — When Barclay says, " The 
 " question is not, who are or are not so led ; but whe- 
 " ther all ought not or may not be so led;" he surely 
 deludes himself. For, in the first place, the proposi- 
 tion that " all ought to be, or may be, so led," is by 
 no means an identical proposition with that which he 
 had just stated to be the affirmation of Friends, — 
 namely, that " the true and undoubted revelation of 
 God's Spirit is certain and infallible :" — and secondly, 
 Of what avail can the admission be, that " all ought 
 " to be, or may be, so led," if there be no means 
 of determining with certainty when they are so led ? 
 If this be left indeterminate, the proposition is the 
 most useless and futile imaginable. — Yet, according 
 to Barclay, the professed subject of immediate reve- 
 lation may deceive himself. What, then, are others 
 to do with his alleged communications? Are they 
 not entitled to demand credentials? Assuredly. For, 
 observe, — even on the assumption that the Scriptures 
 were admitted to be the test, it is not enough that such 
 communications abide the test This, I say, is not 
 
105 
 
 enough. They may be in harmony with the test, and 
 yet, as revelations made ?ioiv, they may have no autho- 
 rity* The revelations made to one Scripture writer 
 were in perfect harmony with those made to another; 
 but each had the authority of a distinct revelation. The 
 authority of what was revealed to Jeremiah did not 
 arise from its agreement with what had been revealed 
 to Isaiah ; nor the authority of what was revealed to 
 Peter from its agreement with what had been revealed 
 to Paul. The authority in each w r as distinct and in- 
 dependent, — each producing his credentials of inspi- 
 ration. We distinctly deny, — not merely, with you, 
 that any thing can be a revelation from the Spirit 
 now that is not in agreement with the Scriptures ; 
 but that there are any new revelations now at all, 
 whether in harmony with the Scriptures or not, — 
 any thing possessing the same authority. We deny 
 that there can be any thing additional, as well as any 
 thing contradictory, — It is plain, that one revelation 
 from the Spirit of truth cannot possess more autho- 
 rity than another. If, therefore, there really be such 
 revelations now, they must have the same title to be 
 standards of the recorded revelations, as the recorded 
 revelations have to be standards of them : — Barclay 
 to be the test of Paul, as Paul to be the test of Bar- 
 clay ! Are any of the Friends, then, prepared to 
 place any of the writings of Fox, or Penn, or Bar- 
 clay, or Gurney, on the same footing, in point of 
 
106 
 
 authority, with those of Jeremiah and Isaiah, of 
 Peter and Paul ? If they refuse to do so, they seem 
 to me virtually to abandon their principles. For the 
 doctrine of immediate revelation necessarily involves 
 equal authority in all who possess it ; — nay, accord- 
 ing to them, the Spirit himself being superior to any 
 external revelation, the immediate intimations re- 
 ceived from Him now, ought, in their estimation, if 
 they are consistent with themselves, to be, of the 
 two, the test of superior certainty ! Yet alas ! for 
 the Friends, if we come to this ! It will then be 
 requisite for us, to admit se/f- contradiction, and mu- 
 tual contradiction, amongst the evidences of inspira- 
 tion ; nothing being more certain, than that Barclay 
 is inconsistent with himself, and that Barclay and 
 Gurney (to enumerate no more) are inconsistent 
 with each other. — And look to the condition of your 
 Society at the present moment. Is it the same Spirit 
 that is dictating all the variety of discordant senti- 
 ment by which it is distracted? It will not avail any 
 of you, in this any more than in a former connexion, 
 to reply to such questions by pointing to the differ- 
 ences subsisting amongst commentators on the Scrip- 
 tures, and amongst the members of other bodies of 
 Christians. The cases, as before, are widely differ- 
 ent. You claim the privilege of immediate inspira- 
 tion. Now such inspiration, if really possessed, must 
 be uniform; its dictates all consistent with each other, 
 
107 
 
 as is the case with the Scripture writers ; and the 
 very absence of such consistency is sufficient to dis- 
 prove the validity of the claim. But commentators 
 claim no such authority for their expositions, nor the 
 members of other Christian communities for their 
 respective standards. Differences among them, there- 
 fore, are no more than what might be expected, from 
 the diversified endowments, and the constitutional 
 and acquired biasses, of different human minds. But 
 the system which makes pretensions to immediate 
 revelation becomes, by such contradictions and in- 
 consistencies, felo de se; inasmuch as each section of 
 the upholders of the system make the same preten- 
 sion, and consequently show, in their differences, one 
 or other of two things, — either that the Spirit of God 
 is not one, or that they have not the Spirit of God, — 
 I mean, of course, in the sense in which they pretend 
 to it : — and between these two conclusions, who will 
 hesitate ? 
 
 There is another point, I may notice fifthly > in re- 
 gard to which Barclay is very inconsistent with him- 
 self, and in which his inconsistency springs from the 
 same source as in the other cases, — namely, the ful- 
 ness of the canon of holy writ, — or, in other words, 
 the completeness of the Scriptures as a discovery of 
 divine truth. This he appears to affirm and deny, 
 to admit and retract, in the most extraordinary man- 
 ner. He seems, for example, in totidem verbis, to 
 
108 
 
 grant that the Scriptures are the test of religious 
 truth, when, in a passage already cited, he says — 
 " Moreover, because they are commonly acknow- 
 " ledged by all to have been written by the dictates 
 " of the Holy Spirit, and that the errors which may 
 " be supposed by the injury of times, to have slipped 
 " in, are not such, but there is a sufficient clear tes- 
 " timony left to all the essentials of the Christian 
 " faith ; we do look upon them as the only Jit outward 
 "judge of controversies among Christians ; and that 
 " whatsoever doctrine is contrary unto their testi- 
 i( mony may therefore justly be rejected as false. 
 " And for our parts we are very willing that all our 
 " doctrines and practices be tried by them ; which 
 " we never refused, nor ever shall, in all controver- 
 sies with our adversaries, as the judge and test. 
 " We shall also be very willing to admit it as a posi- 
 " tive certain maxim, that whatsoever any do, pre- 
 " tending to the Spirit, which is contrary to the 
 " Scriptures, be accounted and reckoned a delusion 
 "of the devil." — Bating the slur that is, here and 
 elsewhere, in this author s writings, thrown upon the 
 Scriptures, as if the variety and accumulation of cor- 
 ruptions had been such, as to render it quite as much 
 as he could conscientiously admit, that they still con- 
 tain " a sufficient clear testimony left to the essen- 
 " tials of the Christian faith;" — as if this testimony 
 were " left" amidst a great deal that had been lost 
 
109 
 
 or wrapt in obscurity by these corruptions ! — a slur 
 that is as false as it is insidious and mischievous ; — 
 bating this, I say, the admission contained in these 
 sentences might be regarded as, in no small degree, 
 satisfactory. But alas! for Barclay's consistency! 
 In the very next page, he writes thus : — " For if the 
 " Jews were directed to try all things by their law, 
 " which was without them, written in tables of stone; 
 " then, if we will have this advice of the prophet to 
 <c reach us," (the advice " To the law and to the 
 Testimony ; if they speak not according to this 
 word, there is no light in them,") " we must make 
 " it hold parallel to that dispensation of the gospel 
 " which we are under : so that we are to try all 
 " things, in the first place, by that word of faith which 
 u is preached unto us, which the apostle saith is in 
 " the heart, and by that law which God hath given 
 u us, which the apostle saith also expressly is written 
 u and placed in the mind/ * 
 
 What a tissue, either of illogical fallacies, or of 
 Jesuitical subtleties, is here ! " I speak as to wise 
 men : judge ye what I say." — 1. In the sentences 
 immediately preceding those quoted, Barclay throws 
 out a doubt, whether, when the prophet, or Jehovah 
 by the prophet, makes his appeal " to the law and to 
 the testimony," this law and testimony might not 
 
 * Apoi. page 87. 
 K 
 
no 
 
 even then signify the inward and not the outward 
 word ! He alleges, that affirming it to signify the 
 latter is a begging of the question ! It is surely 
 marvellous, that any man, with the Scriptures of the 
 Old Testament, and still more with those of the New, 
 in his hand, should be bold enough even to throw out 
 the surmise of such an interpretation ; should venture 
 even to hint, that " the law and the testimony" may- 
 mean any thing else than the revelation then exist- 
 ing, as communicated to Moses and the prophets. It 
 is such an outrage on all the candour of criticism, as 
 to render a refutation of it an insult to the reader's 
 understanding. It were every whit as reasonable to 
 allege, that, when our Lord said to the lawyer who 
 tempted him, " What is written in the law ? how 
 readest thou ?" — he meant the inward, not the out- 
 ward, law, — the law in the heart, not the law in the 
 Book ! Or that, when the Psalmist says — " He 
 established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law 
 in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they 
 should make them known to their children ;" — he 
 might perhaps mean, not the external, but the inter- 
 nal word ! — 2. Apparently sensible that such an ex- 
 planation would not itself bear the test of " the law 
 and the testimony," whether outward or inward, he 
 proceeds to institute a contrast between the outward 
 law of the Jews and the inward law of Christians : — 
 " it may be confessed, without any prejudice to our 
 
Ill 
 
 w cause, that the outward law was more particularly 
 " to the Jews a rule, and more principally than to 
 " us ; seeing their law was outward and literal, but 
 " ours, under the new covenant, is expressly affirmed 
 " to be inward and spiritual ; so that this Scripture 
 " is so far from making against us, that it makes for 
 " us." * — But this is miserable confusion. First of 
 all, Barclay seems altogether to forget, that the same 
 law may be both outward and inward, — in the book 
 and in the heart. It was as much the duty of the 
 Jews to have the law in their hearts, as it is of Chris- 
 tians. It was the express command of Jehovah that 
 they should : — " And these words, which I command 
 thee this day, shall be in thine heart, and thou shalt 
 teach them diligently to thy children." The words 
 of divine instruction and precept were externally 
 given by Moses ; but it was, at the same time, the 
 duty of every Israelite to believe, and love, and obey 
 them. — And this leads me to notice further, that the 
 promise " I will put my laws in their inward parts, 
 and will write them in their hearts," has no reference 
 whatever to any such fancied privilege as individual 
 and immediate revelation of truth or of duty. The 
 promise relates to laws already existing, — and signi- 
 fies the imparting, not merely of a speculative ac- 
 quaintance with these laws to the understanding, but 
 
 * Apol., page 87. 
 K 2 
 
112 
 
 ©fa right disposition towards them in the heart, — or, 
 in one word, the implanting there of that love which 
 is " the fulfilling of the law," — the primary and the 
 secondary love, love to God, and love to men. — To 
 interpret it, as if it meant, that, whereas outward 
 revelation was the standard of truth and duty to the 
 Israelites, inward personal immediate revelation is the 
 standard to us, is not only to assign to Christians a 
 test less fixed and certain, — proved so by all experi- 
 ence, — than that which was enjoyed by God's people 
 under the old economy, but to render the full and 
 clear discoveries of the New Testament Scriptures 
 of less real use to us than the comparatively dark and 
 limited discoveries of the Old were to them. — 3. If 
 " the law and the testimony " are not now to be un- 
 derstood of the outward word, — if under the new 
 dispensation, we are to " try all things, in the first 
 place" by the " word of faith in the heart," then is 
 the outward word, as a test, entirely superseded. If 
 the inward word, or immediate revelation, is the dis- 
 tinguishing privilege of believers under the gospel 
 economy; then, to make use of the outward is to act 
 inconsistently with the divine intention, and to go 
 back to the " beggarly elements" and stinted privileges 
 of Judaism. If we have fulfilled the duty of " trying 
 all things in the first place" by the primary and 
 higher test, what use can there be for the lower and 
 secondary? It can be nothing better than mockery, 
 
113 
 
 after deciding by the first test (which of course, as 
 being the first, must be the more infallible criterion 
 of the two) to talk of applying the second. So that 
 all he had said about the Scriptures as " the only fit 
 " outward judge of controversies among Christians" 
 comes to nothing. I can see consistency and pro- 
 priety in ascending, in the way of appeal, from an 
 inferior to a superior tribunal ; but what consistency 
 or propriety can there be, in obtaining, " in the first 
 place," the decision of the superior court, and then 
 coming down to the inferior ? Would not such a 
 process imply an impeachment of the former's com- 
 petency ? And is there not, in all that Barclay says 
 about the Scriptures as the standard of doctrine and 
 duty, a reflexion involved against the competency of 
 the very test to which he gives the primary place and 
 authority? — Nor is this all. — 4. When the Scriptures 
 (however inconsistently) are admitted as a test; then 
 the question occurs — Of what are they the test? — 
 what is it we are to try by them ? Is it not the very 
 dictates of inward revelation (so called) themselves ? 
 What else is there to be tried ? But if so, how 
 strange the anomalies to which this gives rise ! — 
 When inward or immediate revelation is represented 
 as the test by which, " in the first place," we are to 
 " try all things," then it becomes the test of itself ; — 
 the rule, and the chief rule, by which the authority 
 of its own intimations is to be ascertained ! And 
 k 3 
 
114 
 
 then, when the Scriptures are spoken of as the stand- 
 ard, we have the inferior constituted the test of the 
 superior ; the secondary test the test of the primary- 
 test ! the outward standard the standard of the in- 
 ward standard ! the dictates of the Spirit placed 
 above the external word, and high things said about 
 the unreasonableness of subjecting the spiritual people 
 of God, under the spiritual dispensation of the new 
 covenant, to any merely external rule, or bounding 
 and binding them by a " filled canon ;" — and yet the 
 canon, such as it is, though denied to be a filled or 
 complete one, admitted to be an adequate criterion 
 of every thing pretending to be a dictate of the Spirit 
 now, — and the " external rule" ruling the spiritual 
 rule, and determining the legitimacy of all its pre- 
 scriptions ! — Such are the inconsistencies resulting 
 from a fallacious principle. The truth is, a " filled 
 canon" is one of the blessed privileges of the New 
 Testament church; the chief of those " better things" 
 which " God had prepared for us, that the Old Tes- 
 tament saints without us should not be made perfect;" 
 ■ — and — (pardon me, my friends, I speak in zeal for 
 God's word, not in disrespect for you) — all the mag- 
 niloquence of Quakerism about a higher standard is 
 no better than " great swelling words of vanity." — 
 o. What Barclay says about " the word of faith 
 which is preached unto us, which the apostle saith is 
 in the hearty is most extraordinary. When Paul 
 
115 
 
 speaks of its being in the heart, does he mean that it 
 was there by immediate revelation, independently of 
 outward teaching ? — that it was preached there di- 
 rectly by the Holy Spirit ? To make his language 
 of any avail, to Barclay's purpose, such ought to be 
 the apostle's meaning. But what are Paul's own 
 words? " The word is very nigh thee, in thy mouth 
 and in thine heart, that is the word of faith which we 
 preach, that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the 
 Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God 
 hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." 
 — It was the word, then, which the inspired ambas- 
 sadors preached, and which they who had it in their 
 hearts had received from them. And on the same 
 principle he goes on to ask " How shall they believe 
 in Him of whom they have not heard? and how shall 
 they hear without a preacher ?" Moses was the giver 
 of that law, of which, in the terms appropriated and 
 applied by Paul to the gospel, he tells the Israelites 
 that it was " nigh unto them, in their mouth and in 
 their heart, that they might do it." Does he mean 
 that they had received it by immediate revelation, — 
 in the very same breath in which he speaks of him- 
 self as the medium of its communication ? If not, 
 neither does the apostle. 
 
 With one additional remark, I shall close my stric- 
 tures on this subject; a subject, of which the impor- 
 tance may have led me, perhaps, into too protracted 
 
116 
 
 a discussion. The remark is, that it is not easy to 
 ascertain, with any thing like precision, what is the 
 extent of import which we are to attach to immediate 
 revelation, as claimed by the Friends— We have 
 seen that there is no pretension made to the revela- 
 tion of new truths, but only to the new revelation 
 of old ones. Here is one limit; and although we do 
 find some of the earlier Quakers laying claim to the 
 spirit of prophecy, and foretelling future events; yet 
 this is comparatively rare ; and the predictions are 
 usually on a very small scale. — The sense most com- 
 monly attached to the phrase, in the ordinary use of 
 it amongst Friends, appears to be, not so much the 
 communication of truth to the mind, as the imme- 
 diate superintendence of the Spirit in the direction 
 of the conduct. Thus, William Penn, as quoted by 
 Evans, in giving a summary of doctrine on this head, 
 says — " First, by revelation, we understand the dis- 
 " covery and illumination of the light and Spirit of 
 " God, relating to those things that properly and 
 " immediately concern the daily information and sa- 
 " tisfaction of our souls, in the way of our duty to 
 " him and our neighbour." And afterwards : — < 
 " When neither man nor Scriptures are near us, yet 
 66 there continually attends us that Spirit of truth, 
 " that immediately informs us of our thoughts, words, 
 " and deeds, and gives us true directions what to do, 
 " and what to leave undone. Is not this the rule of 
 
117 
 
 " life ? If ye are led by the Spirit of God, then are 
 "ye sons of God."* — What follows in his statement 
 relates to doctrine, and amounts to a mere denial, 
 under the designation of " fantastical and whimsical 
 intoxications," of all " pretences to the revelation of 
 " new matter, in opposition to the ancient gospel, de- 
 " clared by Christ Jesus and his apostles." " It is 
 " not," he says, " the revelation of new things, but the 
 " new revelation of the eternal way of truth." — That 
 " eternal way of truth," then, is revealed in the 
 Scriptures. I ask again what I have asked before, 
 was that " eternal way of truth" ever revealed to 
 any Friend on earth, independently of the record of 
 it in the Scriptures ? Was " the ancient gospel, 
 declared by Christ and his apostles," ever received by 
 any Friend on earth, by direct communication of the 
 Spirit, independently of the declaration of it there ? 
 " I trow not." And, if not, then it has been, and 
 still is, from the Scriptures after all, and from the 
 Scriptures alone, that Friends as well as others have 
 obtained, and do obtain, if they have it, the know- 
 ledge of that " way of truth" which it is the chief 
 design of the Scriptures to reveal, — the " knowledge 
 of the only true God and of Jesus Christ whom He 
 hath sent." Not one amongst them eve?* had this 
 knowledge otherwise. No, not one. What, then, 
 
 * Exposition, pages 244, 245. 
 
118 
 
 becomes of this " new revelation of the eternal way 
 of truth ?" What is it ? Where is it ? To whose 
 writings are we to look for it ? Is it to those of Fox, 
 or Penn, or Barclay ? Has any one of them, or has 
 any one else, given us a new revelation of " the an- 
 cient gospel declared by Jesus Christ and his apos- 
 tles ?" Alas ! if this is pretended, I must be per- 
 mitted to say " The old is better." They are but 
 human expounders, like others, of divine discoveries; 
 from whom we can dissent without presumption ; and 
 whom, on some important points, we cannot but re- 
 gard, with deep sorrow, as misinterpreters and sub- 
 verters of the ancient gospel. They make no pre- 
 tensions to the revelation of new truths ; yet if the 
 doctrines they teach be truths at all, they are, with- 
 out controversy, new truths. Would to God they 
 had kept more closely to the old ! They differ from 
 the apostles; they differ from one another; they dif- 
 fer from themselves. 
 
 While there is no pretension to any thing new in 
 the department of doctrine; neither, it is presumed, 
 is there any such pretension in the department of 
 moral duty. No Quaker pretends to be an inspired 
 legislator for others ; but every Quaker does pretend 
 to the immediate suggestions of the Spirit, independ- 
 ently of the written record, as the rule of his daily 
 conduct ; — " when neither man nor Scripture is near 
 him." — We have nothing to do with " man ; " but 
 
119 
 
 what is meant by " Scripture not being near him } H 
 You may smile at the question, and reply — Why, 
 that he happens not to have his Bible in his pocket. 
 But ought it not to be felt the incumbent duty of 
 every Christian, to make himself so familiar with the 
 principles and precepts of the sacred volume, as that, 
 in the ordinary course of life, he shall very seldom 
 have occasion for the direct consultation of it? These 
 principles and precepts are not so very numerous, 
 minute, and complicated, as to render this at all a 
 task of difficult accomplishment to any spiritual 
 mind. Let me not be misunderstood, as if I were 
 setting aside the Spirit's agency in the guidance of 
 God's people, and discouraging, consequently, com- 
 pliance with the injunction, " Ask, and ye shall re- 
 ceive." It is not I that am chargeable with setting 
 aside the Spirit; it is the Friends that are chargeable 
 with setting aside the word. In regard to duty, as 
 in regard to truth, I am for retaining both. It is by 
 the ivord that the Spirit guides us to truth, and con- 
 ducts us in duty. This is the general principle; and 
 it is with general principles, not with special excep- 
 tions, I have at present to do. Emergencies may be 
 conceivable, cases of sudden and embarrassing per- 
 plexity, when " neither man nor Scriptures may be 
 near us," when the right application of the general 
 principles and preceptive directions of the record may 
 not at once be manifest, and when there is little or 
 
120 
 
 no time for reflexion or for the consultation of our 
 guide: — that, in such circumstances, the believer 
 should look to God for the influence from above of 
 which he feels his need, who will deny? He will do 
 it, I had almost said, instinctively. But even in such 
 cases, what is his first duty ? Is it to look for the 
 Spirit independently of the word ? I say, no. His 
 first duty is, to try to recollect the principles and 
 precepts of that word, which bear relation to the cir- 
 cumstances in which he is placed, and to look for 
 grace rightly to apply them. The exceptions sup- 
 posed are cases wherein such recollection fails, or 
 leaves the mind in perplexity. What I complain of 
 is, that the Friends reverse the proper order of pro- 
 ceeding; making the general rule the exception, and 
 the exception the general rule. The general rule is 
 • — " Thy word is a light unto my feet, and a lamp 
 unto my path."* The use of the Spirit is, chiefly, 
 to give us simplicity of heart in following this light ; 
 ■ — to remove or counteract those perverse influences 
 which so distort or dim the vision as to prevent our 
 seeing clearly whither it leads us, or by which we are 
 disinclined from following its guidance ; — to impart 
 that humble submission of mind and heart to divine 
 dictation, to which, under the designation of meek- 
 ness, the promise of divine direction is given : — 
 
 * Psalm cxix. 105. 
 
121 
 
 11 The meek he will guide in judgment ; to the meek 
 he will teach his way. 55 * But how does he teach 
 him ? — " Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest. 
 O Lord, and teachest him out of thy laic"\ And 
 what was the method adopted by the Psalmist for 
 his preservation from evil ? — " Thy word have I hid 
 in my heart, that I might not sin against thee."| 
 And this he represents as one of the characteristic 
 distinctions of the righteous man : " The law of his 
 God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide*' 5 g 
 — I greatly fear, that the principle held by Friends 
 on this subject is, in more respects than one, emi- 
 nently pernicious. It prevents them from feeling the 
 necessity of cultivating that familiarity of acquaint- 
 ance with the principles and precepts of the divine 
 record, which is so very desirable; the word of God, 
 dwelling in the heart, being the true " light within' 
 for the guidance of the conduct. And, by inducing 
 them to give themselves up to a system of impres- 
 sions, — to surrender their conduct to the guidance of 
 present impulses, — under the notion of obeying the 
 Spirit, — to expose themselves to many an illusion, 
 and to the danger of many a false step. I should 
 tremble to say this, did I think their way was the 
 way prescribed in the word. But I think otherwise. 
 
 * Psalm xxv. SW f Psalm xciv. 12. 
 
 \ Psalm cxix. 11. § Psalm xxxvii. 31. 
 
122 
 
 And I am persuaded that, in not a few cases of truly 
 serious Friends, who have been found to ascribe, with 
 thankfulness, their preservation in the right way to 
 the immediate suggestions of the Holy Spirit, there 
 has not, after all, been any material difference, in 
 point of fact, whatever there may have been in point 
 of theory, between them and those Christians who 
 have sought to follow the word with the Spirit's aid ; 
 that the dictates of conscience, and the " word of 
 Christ dwelling in them," have been what the one as 
 well as the other have actually obeyed, although un- 
 der different appellations. As to those prototypes of 
 Quakerism, who have professed to live under the 
 constant guidance of a direct inspiration, of the same 
 nature with that possessed by apostles when they 
 " assayed to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit suffered 
 them not," and " were forbidden of the Holy Spirit 
 to preach the word in Asia," I apprehend they exalt 
 themselves in professing to exalt the Spirit ; at any 
 rate, they exalt the Spirit in themselves at the ex- 
 pense of the Spirit in the apostles, by preferring his 
 immediate suggestions to his recorded counsels: — 
 and by themselves, and by the influence of their 
 example, the work of the Spirit has too often been 
 degraded, through the frequent littleness, and occa- 
 sional ludicrousness, of his alleged intimations, as 
 well as, at times, through their very questionable 
 propriety. 
 
123 
 
 In my next Letter, I shall take the liberty of ex- 
 amining the doctrine of Friends respecting the " in- 
 ward light." 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 R. W. 
 
 l2 
 
LETTER IV. 
 
 ON UNIVERSAL INWARD LIGHT, 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 When I first thought of addressing these 
 letters to you, my impression was, that I should not 
 experience any great difficulty on such points of the 
 controversy between you and other bodies of profess- 
 ing Christians, as it was my design to take up. I 
 never found myself more mistaken. But observe 
 wherein the difficulty has lain. I fancied, that, at 
 each step of the controversy, I should have some- 
 thing definite with which to grapple. It is here I 
 have been disappointed. Those views which have 
 been considered as distinctive of the Friends, I have 
 found assuming so great a variety of aspects and 
 modifications among their own writers ; the phrase- 
 ology used, with apparent explicitness, by one, em- 
 ployed by another in a sense, however analogous, yet 
 so materially different; that I have been greatly at a 
 loss, and have at times been about to relinquish my 
 purpose, in fretfulness and disgust. For after having, 
 in my own mind, and to my own satisfaction, met 
 
125 
 
 and refuted a particular statement of doctrine, I have 
 found it starting up in a new or greatly altered form, 
 to which the previous answers were, in some points, 
 not at all suitable. If this has been the case with 
 regard to the subject of my former letters, it has been 
 still more so on that of the present. Never was 
 there a more perfect Proteus than your inward light. 
 Like every thing mystical, it is undefined, and as 
 variable as the mountain mists of the morning. There 
 is no catching, no fixing, no analysing it. When 
 you think you have got it in something of a tangible 
 shape ; when you have put it into your crucible, and 
 exposed it to the furnace of criticism, and have eva- 
 porated it till you have left no residuum, no sub- 
 stance of thought ; — lo ! in the bottom of your ves- 
 sel, it reappears in a different form, for which you 
 must vary the process of trial ; — and, when this has 
 been done, with the same result, you have only to 
 begin again. 
 
 Nothing could be easier than, by patching together 
 the varied phraseology in which different, or even 
 the same writers, have clothed this inward light, to 
 invest the whole system with the grotesque and pie- 
 bald garment of ludicrous incongruity. I am aware, 
 however, that ridicule is not the test of truth ; and 
 such a mode of treatment of one of your fundamen- 
 tal articles, would ill comport with the avowed kindly 
 feeling and friendly design of these letters. That I 
 l3 
 
126 
 
 may not, therefore, either, on the one hand, do in- 
 justice to your principles, or, on the other, make one 
 writer responsible for the sentiments of another, it is 
 my intention, on the present subject, to take up, in 
 the first instance, the view of it which is presented 
 by your most highly and justly esteemed living wri- 
 ter, Joseph John Gurney, — to take that view hy itself, 
 independently altogether of the sentiments and lan- 
 guage of the more primitive and thorough-going 
 Quakers. Many among you, I have reason to think, 
 complain of Mr Gurney, as having, on some points, 
 laid himself open to the charge of compromising and 
 betraying the cause of true primitive Quakerism. 
 And assuredly, if such writers as the author of 
 " Truth Vindicated" are to be considered as fair ex- 
 pounders of your original system, there is ground 
 for the imputation ; for between the ancient Quaker- 
 ism of Fox, and Penn, and even of Barclay, and the 
 modern Quakerism of Mr Gurney, there are differ- 
 ences of no trivial amount.— I am desirous, however, 
 to do justice to Mr Gurney ; and shall therefore, in 
 the first instance, take up his views of the " univer- 
 sal light," contained in the " Addendum to Chapter 
 I.," in the seventh edition of his " Observations on 
 the distinguishing views and practices of the Society 
 of Friends." The Addendum bears date " a. d. 
 1834." 
 
 I find little that appears objectionable in the gen- 
 
127 
 
 eral principles laid down by Mr Gurney on the sub- 
 ject of human accountableness. This accountable - 
 ness may be regarded in relation to two points, — 
 knowledge and obedience; and these correspond to 
 their respective objects, the former to truth, the lat- 
 ter to duty. — In order to accountableness, in the 
 form of culpability, for the want of the knowledge 
 of truth, two things are self-evidently necessary ; 
 sufficient means of discovery, and sufficient capacity 
 of understanding. To these, indeed, in some cases, 
 a third might be added, unless it be regarded as 
 included in the first — sufficient evidence. These 
 three things clearly exhaust all that is requisite to 
 constitute a ground of responsibility, — means, capa- 
 city, and evidence. I have mentioned the third dis- 
 tinctly from the first, merely because the two seem 
 to be so distinguished by our Lord, when he says of 
 the Jew r s, — " If I had not come and spoken to them, 
 they had not had sin :" — " If I had not done among 
 them the works which no other man did, they had 
 not had sin :' the former sentence relating to infor- 
 mation, the latter to evidence. — To speak as if, in any 
 case, the actual possession of knowledge were neces- 
 sary to accountableness for the absence of it, is obvi- 
 ously to speak in terms of self-contradiction. If, in 
 any case, the knowledge to be attained requires, in 
 order to its attainment, the previous knowledge of 
 something else, then the possession of this previous 
 
128 
 
 knowledge must be reckoned as a part of the first 
 particular — sufficient means. But nothing can be 
 more self-evident than that the possession of know- 
 ledge can in no wise be necessary to accountableness 
 for the absence of itself ! How far Mr Gurney does 
 not lay himself open to the charge of maintaining 
 something very like this self-contradictory proposi- 
 tion, may by and by appear. 
 
 With regard to responsibility in the department of 
 moral duty, — there must be a law, and there must 
 be the means of knowing that law. The responsi- 
 bility of the Gentiles, or heathen, therefore, implies 
 their having a law ; for " where no law is, there is 
 no transgression." If from their not having the 
 ivritten law, it followed that they had no law, it would 
 have followed also, that they had no responsibility. 
 But they have a law, — the law of nature and of con- 
 science ; — a law, of whose dictates the clearness and 
 fulness have, by moral causes existing in the depra- 
 vity of man's fallen nature, been very sadly impaired. 
 For this deficiency, as springing from such causes, he 
 is accountable and culpable ; and, the deficiency it- 
 self thus involving blame, it does not, in any degree, 
 diminish his responsibility. — Neither in regard to the 
 knowledge of God himself, nor in regard to the know- 
 ledge of God's will, is there any thing farther neces- 
 sary to constitute men " without excuse" for their 
 ignorance and for all its results, than the three things 
 
129 
 
 mentioned, — sufficient mea?is } sufficient capacity ', and 
 sufficient evidence. 
 
 It appears to me — (if I am wrong, it will be from 
 misunderstanding, not misrepresentation) — that Mr 
 Gurney reasons incorrectly, when, besides his two 
 particulars, (under the former of which he evidently 
 includes my third) — the means and the capacity of 
 knowledge, he speaks of something more, as required 
 in the ground of accountableness, — namely, a certain 
 measure of knowledge itself actually and directly 
 imparted. Thus he writes — pages 49, 50 : — " It is 
 " evident that the ungodliness of the Gentiles is 
 " here condemned" (that is in Rom. i. 18 — 23) " on 
 " the ground that some knowledge of divine truth 
 " was bestowed upon them. Not only were they 
 " furnished with a visible evidence, in the outward 
 " creation, of the eternal power and godhead of Je* 
 " hovah, but ' that which may be known of God was 
 " manifest in them.' They were not left without 
 " some sense of his holiness, and of their responsi- 
 " bility to him, as the righteous governor of the 
 " world. Thus it appears, that their guilt consisted 
 " in restraining the truth by their unrighteousness. 
 " Graciously provided as they were, not only with 
 " outward proofs of the omnipotence of God, but 
 " with a measure of light respecting his moral gov- 
 " ernment, they nevertheless followed the corrupt 
 " desires and devices of their own hearts. They held 
 
130 
 
 " the truth in bondage, not yielding to its influence, 
 " so that it was suppressed in their hearts, and did 
 "not rise into dominion." — In the former part of 
 this passage, he distinguishes between the knowledge 
 of God, in what are called his natural perfections, 
 derived from the external indications of these perfec- 
 tions in the works of creation, — and the knowledge 
 of God in his relation to men as their moral Gov- 
 ernor, which, according to him, is more directly 
 " shown unto them," and " manifest in them," — not 
 deduced, but imparted. Had he meant by this no 
 more than that such knowledge originated in the dic- 
 tates of natural conscience, suggesting and maintain- 
 ing in the mind the sense of responsibility to a moral 
 Governor, there had been little, if any thing, pecu- 
 liar or objectionable. But this " inward universal 
 light" — on which, much more than on the inferential 
 knowledge of God from his works, he conceives the 
 apostle's argument respecting accountableness to rest, 
 as " on a far stronger and wider basis," — he does not 
 consider as natural, but as a work of the Spirit of 
 God ; and a work of the Spirit, in virtue of the me- 
 diation of Jesus Christ. It is to this view of the 
 case that I have to beg your special attention. 
 
 The true state of things in regard to man's know- 
 ledge of God and of his law, appears to be this. The 
 knowledge of both was originally possessed. The 
 knowledge of both ought alike to have been retained. 
 
131 
 
 The knowledge of both was to a great extent per- 
 verted and lost. And the causes of the perversion 
 and loss were, in regard to both, the same. They 
 were moral causes. When the apostle says " They 
 did not like to retain God in their knowledge," he 
 states a principle which is quite as applicable to 
 the law of God, as to God himself, — to his will, as 
 to his character. We cannot surely marvel, that 
 the two should be found in the same predicament. 
 There is no more reason to wonder at the per- 
 version of the law, than at the perversion of the 
 truth. It was the will of God that was chiefly ob- 
 noxious to the dislike of human depravity. Could his 
 nature have been separated from his will ; could his 
 will have been different from his nature ; could his 
 will have tolerated evil, while his nature continued 
 holy; could his nature thus have been to man a mere 
 subject of abstract speculation, which did not, in any 
 way, interfere with the gratification of his own evil 
 inclinations : — we could then, without difficulty, have 
 formed the conception of his will being perverted 
 into accommodation to the propensities of the human 
 heart, while conceptions sufficiently correct continued 
 to be entertained of his nature. But such a suppo- 
 sition manifestly involves the very grossest absurdity 
 and contradiction. God's nature and God's will are 
 correlates ; the latter having a necessary correspond- 
 ence to the former ; — so that to " retain God in their 
 
132 
 
 knowledge" was to retain the opposite of all the un- 
 holy dispositions of their own hearts, the peremptory 
 and uncompromising condemnation of all evil. This 
 is the cause to which, in a manner the farthest pos- 
 sible from flattering to man's moral dignity, the phi- 
 losophy of the Bible traces the loss of the knowledge 
 of God. And in these circumstances, it cannot be, 
 that the direct bestowment of new information, while 
 the original and permanent means of knowledge are 
 wilfully resisted, should be necessary to constitute a 
 reasonable ground of responsibility. This would be 
 to make the very perversity of man destructive of 
 his accountableness ; nay, to make God accountable 
 to man, and lay the Creator under an obligation of 
 justice to undo the effects of the creature's wilful and 
 froward wickedness. 
 
 I should have little objection to adopt the state- 
 ment in page 52 : — " Hence it appears, that, accord- 
 " ing to the views of this inspired writer" (Paul, in 
 his epistle to the Romans), " the sinfulness of men 
 " and the knowledge of the divine law are absolutely 
 " co-extensive ; and, since all men are sinners, it in- 
 " evitably follows that all men have some knowledge 
 "of the law:"— only I should resist the conclusion, 
 that any knowledge, either of God or of his law, be- 
 yond that which man has naturally the means of 
 acquiring, is necessary, to constitute a ground for his 
 moral responsibility. If he does not know, he ought 
 
133 
 
 to know ; and his ignorance of what he ought to 
 know can never absolve him from his accountable- 
 ness ; his ignorance being the result of his dislike to 
 knowledge, and his dislike to knowledge of his fond- 
 ness for evil, on the free indulgence of which the 
 knowledge was an irksome restraint. But the know- 
 ledge of which Mr Gurney speaks is a knowledge 
 which comes from another source than nature, — be- 
 ing a universal result to mankind of the mediation of 
 Jesus Christ, — and imparted by a universal influence 
 of the Holy Spirit. This is the essential principle 
 of his theory, and common to him with other Qua- 
 kers. The consequences we shall see immediately. 
 
 The distinction made by Mr G. between the " uni- 
 versal light'' and conscience, — the former meaning the 
 knowledge of the law or " righteous rule," and the 
 latter the exercise of a judicial function in bringing 
 words and actions to the test of that rule, and giving 
 sentence upon them, — I shall notice more particularly 
 in a little. Meanwhile it may be observed, that, 
 although no one will question the position that " the 
 " law is not perceived, and that conscience does not 
 u operate, when the intellect is not developed ;" that 
 ••' our moral faculties are bestowed upon us as rational 
 " beings ; and that wherever reason is dormant, they 
 "will of necessity be dormant also;" — yet there 
 appears to be an extraordinary incorrectness, in 
 classing together, as exemplifications of the position, 
 M 
 
134 
 
 " infants, idiots, and some of the wildest tribes of 
 i '- uncultivated men." Surely there should be a dis- 
 crimination here. The two former of these are not 
 subjects of moral accountableness; for, even although 
 the idiocy of the second may have been induced by 
 causes involving a large portion of moral delinquency, 
 for which a fearful account may justly be exacted; 
 yet we cannot but conceive the cessation of account- 
 ableness to be synchronous with the cessation of in- 
 tellect, — irresponsibility with irrationality. But when 
 the Apostle Paul, in speaking of the heathen, says 
 " they are without excuse," he makes no distinctions 
 between cultivated and uncultivated men. He classes 
 under one description and one condemnation, (though 
 no doubt, as in the case of individuals, admitting of 
 various degrees,) all the tribes of the Gentile world. 
 — Mr Gurney, after classing with infants and idiots, 
 as coming " to a considerable extent" under the 
 same category with them, " some of the wildest tribes 
 of uncultivated men," proceeds to add : " But no 
 " sooner do we rise a little higher in the scale of rea- 
 " son, than the moral faculties begin to display them- 
 " selves." — Now it would be a problem of no little 
 interest, but certainly of no less difficulty, to deter- 
 mine at what point, in the ascending scale of the 
 development of reason, moral responsibility com- 
 mences ; — what tribes of mankind come within the 
 pale of accountableness, and what tribes have the — 
 
135 
 
 privilege shall I call it ? — of being beyond it. With- 
 out doubt, " the Judge of all the earth will do right," 
 forming his judicial estimates of character according 
 to unerring views of all the circumstances of situa- 
 tion. But there are obvious differences between the 
 case of infancy, in which the term of responsibility 
 must vary according to the earliness or the lateness of 
 mental development in individuals, and in tribes and 
 nations of men, whose brutal debasement, consisting 
 in the unresisted sway of their sensual appetites and 
 lusts, has had its origin in moral causes, and displays 
 itself in effects such as are in sad harmony with the 
 general description of heathenism by the pen of the 
 inspired author of the epistle to the Romans. How 
 far the principle we have hinted at in regard to those 
 who have been rendered fatuous by the influence of 
 licentious indulgence, may be applied to such tribes 
 as have sunk, by the operation of similar causes, into 
 a state of intellectual brutality, must be left to infinite 
 wisdom and justice to determine. It is not with such 
 questions I have at present to do. It is with the 
 bearing of such views as Mr Gurney thus advances 
 upon his own doctrine of the " universal light." If 
 there be a point in " the scale of reason," amongst 
 the tribes of the human family, at which " the moral 
 faculties begin to display themselves ;" then, in regard 
 to those who are below that point, what has become 
 of this light, — this universal inward light? Accord- 
 M 2 
 
136 
 
 ing to Mr G. this ligbt is the ground of accountable- 
 ness. If, therefore, the light be universal, so must 
 the accountableness be universal. And remember, 
 it is not a general, but an individual universality 
 which Mr Gurney, and other Friends in common 
 with him, maintain. The light " lighteth every man 
 that cometh into the world." " Every man that 
 cometh into the world," then, being a possessor of 
 this light, is, as such, responsible ; — and whatever 
 degree of intellectual development Mr G. may con- 
 ceive to be necessary to moral accountableness, must, 
 as a matter of course, to render his theory consistent 
 with itself, be included in this light; else those un- 
 cultivated tribes in whom the moral faculties have 
 not " begun to display themselves," will be in the 
 self-contradictory predicament of accountable and not 
 accountable. — The force of these remarks will be 
 more apparent immediately, when we notice Mr 
 Gurney's theory of the origin, or procuring cause, of 
 the universal light. 
 
 I have already adverted to the distinction made by 
 Mr Gurney between the moral light and conscience. 
 He thus expresses it : — " It is a remarkable proof of 
 " the inaccuracy of our moral philosophers, that, 
 " while they so generally admit the universality of 
 u this moral light, they confound it, in terms, with 
 " the faculty of conscience : — whereas it is evident, 
 " that the two things are no more identical, than is 
 
137 
 
 " the law of the land with the judge on the bench 
 " who administers it." Page 56. — He goes on to 
 show, in a way which I am not disposed to contro- 
 vert, that the perverting influence of the fall has 
 affected, not the law, but the judge, — not the light, 
 but conscience ; and he briefly, but clearly and for- 
 cibly, states the different modes and degrees in which 
 the perverting influence appears. — Now, suppose we 
 grant Mr G. the correctness of his distinction between 
 conscience and the law ; yet, although they are not 
 identical, he will not deny them, as subsisting together 
 in the human bosom, to be correlates, and propor- 
 tionals to each other. There can be no judge where 
 there is no law. There can, in like manner, be no 
 conscience, where there is no " moral light," or 
 knowledge of the law. " The law is the light"'- — says 
 Mr Gurney elsewhere, and the metaphor is in excel- 
 lent taste, — " the law is the light ; the conscience is 
 the eye" Now the light is as necessary to vision as 
 the eye, and the eye as necessary as the light Vision 
 requires both ; and the measure of vision is in pro- 
 portion to the soundness of the eye and the clearness 
 of the light. Does it not, then, follow, that beneath 
 the point at which " the moral faculties begin to de- 
 velop themselves," there can be no conscience ? It 
 is not a satisfactory answer to this, to say there is 
 " the germ of conscience." The question relates to 
 accountableness. The existence of the germ of con- 
 M 3 
 
138 
 
 science in infants and idiots does not constitute them 
 accountable moral agents : — and if, in such " uncul- 
 tivated tribes" there exists only the latent germ of 
 conscience, while, as a moral faculty, it has not be- 
 gun to develop itself; then there can be no more 
 than the germ too of the moral light, or knowledge 
 of God's law. For the law without the judge would 
 be as unavailing as the judge without the law ; the 
 light without conscience, as conscience without the 
 light. What would the mere knowledge of the law 
 be, without conscience " accusing or excusing?" 
 We cannot fancy the one without the other. Where 
 the one exists only in its undeveloped germ, so must 
 the other also. And where there is no more than 
 the germ of conscience, and the germ of law, there 
 can be no more than the germ of accountableness ; 
 that is, no more real moral responsibility than in in- 
 fants and idiots. 
 
 But, as I have said, in order to our seeing clearly 
 the objectionableness of Mr Gurney's theory, we 
 must attend more especially to the source or origin 
 of the " universal light." This is explicitly and 
 luminously stated in the following paragraph : — 
 " The reality and universality of the law, or, in other 
 " words, of the light, being allowed, I would ask, 
 " What is it, and whence does it come ? Is it, as 
 " Lord Bacon imagines, ' a sparkle of the purity of 
 " man's first estate ?' — or is it a work of the Spirit 
 
139 
 
 " — an especial gift, bestowed on the fallen children 
 " of Adam, ' through the redemption that is in Christ 
 " Jesus ?' I am persuaded, that the principal reason 
 " why Bishop Butler, and other Christian philoso- 
 " phers, have ascribed this light to our own nature 
 " is, that they have confounded it with conscience ; 
 C£ which must, of course, be regarded as one of our 
 " natural faculties. Distinguish the law from the 
 u conscience — the pure infallible guide from the fal- 
 11 lible and often perverted judge — and we at once 
 " perceive, that an enlightening principle, which va- 
 " ries in degree indeed, but never in character, — un- 
 " changeably holy, heavenly, divine — without any 
 " mixture of error or taint of sin — cannot possibly 
 " be inherent by nature in the dark and corrupt mind 
 " of man. On the broadest scriptural principles, we 
 " must trace it immediately to God — to the Holy 
 u Spirit as the author of true moral illumination — to 
 " the Son as the Mediator through whom all spirit- 
 " ual blessings flow — to the Father as the only spring 
 " of every good and perfect gift. Between the de- 
 M claration of Paul that Christ gave himself a ' ran- 
 " som for all,' and that of John, that he c lighteth 
 " every man that cometh into the world, 1 there is 
 '•' surely a most satisfactory and delightful accord- 
 " ance." Pages 58, 59. 
 
 There is, in such a statement, in as far as it traces 
 all moral light, and all the benefits resulting from it, 
 
HO 
 
 to the mediation of Christ, something so congenial to 
 the grateful feelings of the Christian — that it may 
 seem like an attempt to reduce the amount of obli- 
 gation under which mankind lie to the divine Medi- 
 ator, if we presume to touch it. But to me there 
 appear in it several great and glaring fallacies, to the 
 brief exposure of which I solicit the candid attention 
 of Mr Gurney's own enlightened mind : and, at the 
 same time, the candid attention of you all ; for the 
 ground taken by Mr Gurney is that of the Friends in 
 general, — an integral part of their system. The light 
 is represented by Barclay, as " not less universal than 
 " the seed of sin, being the purchase of his death who 
 " < tasted death for every man.' " 
 
 1. In the first place, then ; — with regard to those 
 " tribes of uncultivated men," already more than 
 once adverted to, what is this light? — When we find 
 it so distinctly, and in terms so elevated as those just 
 cited from Mr Gurney, represented as one of the 
 benefits of Christ's mediation ; — and as a benefit 
 bestowed on every individual man, " lighting every 
 man that cometh into the world;" — is it very hon- 
 ourable to the efficiency of the divine Redeemer's 
 mediation, that, in regard to multitudes of men born 
 into the world, and individually subjects of its illu- 
 mination, this light should be found in fact, agreeably 
 to Mr Gurney's description, leaving the intellect 
 undeveloped, — the reason dark, — the moral faculties, 
 
141 
 
 in consequence, dormant, — and the conscience, if it 
 can be said to exist at all, existing only in its germ f 
 — It is an unsatisfactory reply to such questions, 
 which is given indirectly in the closing sentence of 
 the paragraph referred to — " With respect to all such 
 " persons, it may be emphatically said, that 6 the 
 " light shineth in darkness, and that the darkness com- 
 " prehendeth it notJ n — For, observe of what descrip- 
 tion of light these words were originally used. It 
 was not an inward but an outward light. It was 
 Christ himself. He was the true light. He says of 
 himself, " I am come a light into the world." If 
 this light " ligliteth every man that cometh into the 
 world," then the inward light comes from the out- 
 ward. It is not the inward light that is repre- 
 sented by the Evangelist as shining in darkness; it is 
 the Light from which the inward light is supposed 
 to be derived. But it is of the inward light itself 
 that Mr Gurney speaks. We can readily conceive 
 how a light extraneous to human minds should shine 
 amidst the darkness of those minds, and not be ap- 
 prehended by them. But in what manner an inter- 
 nal light, — a light in the mind itself, — imparted there 
 by immediate divine illumination, and imparted uni- 
 versally, to each individual man, — " not inherent by 
 " nature in man's dark and corrupt mind," but to be 
 " traced immediately to God, — to the Holy Spirit as 
 " the author of all true moral illumination — to the Son 
 
142 
 
 " as the mediator through whom all spiritual blessings 
 " flow — to the Father, as the only spring and origin of 
 " every good and perfect gift ;" — how such a light — 
 " unchangeable, holy, heavenly, divine," — should sub- 
 sist in the mind, while yet the mind itself remains in 
 a state of both intellectual and moral darkness, nei- 
 ther reason nor conscience developed, but the rational 
 and moral powers alike dormant ! — this is a theorem 
 of mysticism, of which it is not for me to attempt the 
 solution. — It is vain to say, that every man has this 
 light " for a time," that time being, to each, the day 
 of his salvation ; for, apart from all abstract reason- 
 ing, where, among the " uncultivated tribes" of 
 whom we are at present speaking, is there, in point 
 of fact, to be found the remotest appearance of cor- 
 respondence between this and reality, — the slightest 
 indications, in the case of each individual, of such 
 temporary possession and subsequent loss, — of a pe- 
 riod of enlightenment succeeded by self-induced 
 darkness? Were this at all apparent, there might 
 be some reason in the solution. But Mr G. himself 
 speaks of these tribes as the exemplar of a particular 
 state or stage of society, in which the ignorance is 
 universal and hereditary, passing down from genera- 
 tion to generation, and reigning over all, from child- 
 hood to age, with a death-like uniformity ; — a dark- 
 ness in which, even according to his own representa- 
 tion, the light does not shine. 
 
143 
 
 2. In regard to the next, the superior class, in 
 whom " the moral faculties have begun to display 
 themselves," — that is, with regard to the heathen 
 world at large, the hypothesis makes the inward 
 light, as imparted by the Spirit, in virtue of the 
 mediation of Christ, the basis of accountableness. — 
 It is manifest, that there can be no accountableness 
 without light. The highest authority has settled this: 
 — " if ye were blind, ye should have no sin;' And 
 it might, indeed, be assumed as a first truth, — a truth 
 of self-evident certainty. In order, then, to account- 
 ableness being universal, the light that is necessary 
 to it must be universal. And, according to the hy- 
 pothesis before us, this light is not conscience, — is 
 not the light of nature; it is direct spiritual illumi- 
 nation from God, on the ground of the mediation of 
 his Son. It clearly follows, that the very account- 
 ableness of men arises from the mediation of Christ, 
 inasmuch as it arises from the possession of a light 
 imparted on the ground of this mediation. — Now, this 
 is, in the strict, literal, etymological sense of the term, 
 preposterous. It is first last, and last first. We are 
 accustomed, on the surest grounds, to regard the 
 mediation of Christ, as occasioned and rendered 
 necessary by the sinfulness and guilt of men ; as de- 
 signed to provide deliverance for them from this state 
 of sin and condemnation, — the pardon of their guilt, 
 and the renovation of their hearts. But according 
 
144 
 
 to this most extraordinary theory, it is Christ's me- 
 diation that places men in circumstances of responsi- 
 bility, — procuring for them the light that is neces- 
 sary to constitute them responsible. So that, since 
 there can be no guilt where there is no responsibility. 
 the very mediation which by the Scriptures is repre- 
 sented as the divine means of saving men from guilt, 
 is in truth the origin of the very guilt from which it 
 is appointed to save ; — and, since the universality 
 claimed for the inward light includes all generations 
 as well as all countries, thus it has been from the 
 beginning ! If there be any fallacy in this conclu- 
 sion, I do not perceive it. There must be light be- 
 fore there can be accountableness ; there must be 
 accountableness, before there can be guilt ; there 
 must be guilt before there can be mediation. But, 
 according to this theory, the last is first. The medi- 
 ation procures the light ; founds the responsibility ; 
 gives origin to the guilt ; and then saves from it ! 
 
 3. Even on the supposition that these anomalies 
 could be harmonized, it is "passing strange" to 
 identify this light, — the light which consists in the 
 knowledge of the law or " righteous rule" of duty, 
 with Christ himself. It is of Christ himself that the 
 evangelist John says — " That was the true light that 
 lighteth every man. that cometh into the world." 
 Now, whatever be the meaning of the words (an 
 inquiry which may come before us by and by), 
 
& 
 
 145 
 
 whatever, I say, be their meaning in application to 
 Christ himself, there is a previous question, whether 
 Christ and the inward light, the moral light, the 
 universal light, for which Mr Gurney contends, be 
 the same thing. — That the Friends in general, in the 
 entire strain of their phraseology, speak of them as 
 if they were, is a matter of fact, respecting which 
 there can be no doubt. The hostility of their sys- 
 tem to all that is merely external (which may be re- 
 garded as its leading characteristic) naturally tends to 
 this. Let me not be misunderstood. Opposition to 
 mere externality in all that relates to religious ser- 
 vice, is right. " God is a Spirit; and they that wor- 
 ship him must worship him in Spirit and in truth :" 
 — and as the requisition of spiritual worship is not 
 here founded on any peculiarity of a particular dis- 
 pensation, but on the very nature and essence of 
 Deity, it must always have been true, whatever might 
 be the external forms under which he ordained his 
 worship to be performed, that spirituality was neces- 
 sary to his having any complacency in its acts or 
 utterances. But hostility to what is external is car- 
 ried to a wild extreme, when not only does it set 
 aside outward institutions as means of promoting 
 what is inward, but identifies outward existences with 
 inward principles. The Friends speak of the Christ 
 within, in a manner that leads the mind away from 
 the Christ without. If by the " Christ within" no- 
 
146 
 
 thing more were meant, than the Christ without 
 believed on in the mind, and trusted and loved in the 
 heart, it were well. This is clearly the import of 
 any similar phrases in the New Testament. When 
 Paul says to the Colossians — " Which is Christ in 
 you the hope of glory," what more does he mean, 
 than that the Redeemer, who had died for their sins, 
 was the object of their faith and love ? How else 
 was it possible for him to be in them ? The terms 
 are explained (if indeed they can be said to need 
 explanation) when the same apostle mentions it as 
 one of his petitions for the Ephesian believers, " that 
 Christ might dwell in their hearts by faith." For 
 what can this mean, but that Christ, as the object of 
 their faith, should be the object of their fervent and 
 abiding love ? — just as, to express the strength of his 
 own affection for his fellow-christians, he says to 
 them — " I have you in my heart ;" " ye are in our 
 hearts, to die and to live with you." Phil. i. 7. 2 
 Cor. vii. 3. — But is this the sense in which the 
 Friends are wont to speak of the Christ within ? — A 
 more general reply to this question I reserve for an- 
 other letter. At present I have to do with the sen- 
 timents and language exclusively of Joseph John 
 Gurney ; and shall not, therefore, by quoting from 
 others, even seem to make him responsible for their 
 views. He has, to no inconsiderable extent, modi- 
 fied the phraseology of Quakerism ; and the modifi- 
 
147 
 
 cation of its phraseology is the consequence of a 
 modification of its principles. Yet what, on the pre- 
 sent subject, is his own language ? — " In a former 
 " chapter, I have called the attention of the reader 
 " to the doctrine, that a measure of the Spirit of the 
 " Son of God is bestowed upon all mankind ; and I 
 " have endeavoured to show it to be in reference to 
 " his spiritual appearance in the hearts of his creatures, 
 " that Christ is styled the ' true light, which lighteth 
 " every man that cometh into the world.' " Pages 76, 
 77. It is evident, that, in this phraseology, Christ's 
 " spiritual appearance in the hearts of his creatures" 
 corresponds to the " Christ within" in the ordinary 
 nomenclature of Quakerism. Now what is this 
 " spiritual appearance in the hearts of his creatures," 
 in the case of those who have never heard of him ? 
 In giving his exposition of John i. 9. to which we 
 may hereafter advert, Mr Gurney, after explaining 
 verse 4. "In him was life, and the life was the light 
 of men," as referring to " the Word" previously to 
 his being " made flesh," and as meaning — " that the 
 " Son, or Word, of God, or the Messiah, in his ori- 
 " ginal and divine character, was the giver of eternal 
 " life, and the spiritual quickener and illuminator of 
 " the children of men," subjoins, in a distinct para- 
 graph — pages 38, 39. " Since such appears to be 
 " the true meaning of verse 4. we cannot reasonably 
 " hesitate in our interpretation of verse 9. In the 
 n2 
 
148 
 
 " former, the light is said to be in or by the Word ; 
 " in the latter, according to a very usual figure of 
 " speech, the Word, being the source of the light, is 
 " himself denominated ' Light/ The light, in either 
 " case, must be of the same character ; and, if there 
 " be any correctness in the view we have now taken 
 " of the whole passage, it can be no other than the 
 " light of the Spirit of the Son of God, Hence, 
 " therefore, I conclude, on the authority of the apos- 
 " tie John, that a measure of the light of the Spirit 
 " of the Son of God ' lighteth every man that cometh 
 " into the world. 9 " 
 
 I presume Mr Gurney will readily admit that hav- 
 ing "a measure of the light of the Spirit" is equiva- 
 lent to having a measure of the Spirit itself, — the 
 Spirit imparting the light. Now, in Scripture phra- 
 seology, having the Spirit of Christ, and having 
 Christ, — having the Spirit of Christ dwelling in us, 
 and having Christ dwelling in us, are expressions 
 significant of the same privilege, and are employed 
 interchangeably : — " But ye are not in the flesh but 
 in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in 
 you : now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, 
 he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body- 
 is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because 
 of righteousness : and if the Spirit of Him that raised 
 up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised 
 up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mor- 
 
149 
 
 tal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." It will 
 follow, that to speak of the heathen as having the 
 Spirit of Christ in them is the same as to speak of 
 their having Christ in them. And this brings Mr 
 Gurney's phraseology into a near approximation to 
 the current language of the Quaker body. There is 
 in it a great deal more of moderation, rationality, and 
 consistency, than in the views respecting the inward 
 light, promulgated by the more primitive, but, till 
 now, standard writers of that body ; and incompa- 
 rably more than in the crude, undiscriminating, and 
 incomprehensible style of writing and talking on this 
 subject, prevalent amongst every-day Friends. Mean- 
 time observe, to what, according to Mr Gurney, this 
 " light of the Spirit" amounts. When presenting 
 what he conceives to be special instances of extraor- 
 dinary light among the heathen, he says — pages 61, 
 62 — " These may be regarded as rare instances; but 
 " they are far from being solitary ones. They may 
 " at least serve the purpose of showing the nature 
 " and origin of that law by which the natural con- 
 " sciences of men are illuminated, and by which they 
 " may be rectified. It appears to be a doctrine truly 
 " consistent with the scope and tenor of Scripture, 
 " and with the breadth of that foundation which is 
 " laid in Zion, — even the foundation of Jesus Christ 
 " and him crucified, that as every man born into the 
 " world receives a measure of moral light, so every 
 n3 
 
150 
 
 " man born into the world has his day of spiritual 
 " visitation." — The light, then, for which Mr Gurney 
 contends, is simply " the law by which the conscience 
 " is illuminated," " moral light," — elsewhere denomi- 
 nated by him " a manifestation of the divine law, 
 accompanied with a portion of quickening and puri- 
 fying power" — page 40, and in former editions of the 
 same work, in terms for which these have been sub- 
 stituted, " a moral sense of right and wrong, accom- 
 panied with a portion of quickening and redeeming 
 power." 
 
 Now, although I am sensible, that, were I to quote 
 from others, I might find ground on which my ob- 
 jections would appear in much greater force, yet I 
 keep to Mr Gurney. 
 
 Be it remembered, then, in the first place, that the 
 light for which Mr G. contends, as possessed, in a 
 measure by " every man that cometh into the world/ 
 is not, in any degree, natural. It exists not in any 
 man by nature ; and is not by nature attainable. It 
 is imparted, in each individual man, by the imme- 
 diate illumination of the Spirit of God — Two ques- 
 tions, then, here suggest themselves. First, is it not 
 somewhat strange, to admit that by nature we have 
 conscience, while we have not, by nature, any por- 
 tion of the knowledge by which alone, it is granted, 
 conscience can be of any use ? — a " natural faculty" 
 altogether unaccompanied by any of the means of its 
 
151 
 
 exercise ! — an eye by nature, but no light by nature ! 
 Is this consistent ? Is it reasonable ? Is there any 
 thing else analogous to it in the works of God, and 
 especially amongst the endowments of his rational 
 creatures ? If by the fall we had lost entirely that 
 knowledge by which alone conscience can operate, I 
 see not, for my own part, how we could have re- 
 tained the faculty ; — any more than w T e could have 
 had even the least conception of what an eye is, if 
 the moment that sin entered, light had disappeared. 
 — Why suppose the faculty retained, and the means 
 of its exercise lost ? — the eye kept, and the light 
 gone ? If we have the one by nature, why not tlit 
 other ? 
 
 " Although the knowledge of this holy law," says 
 Mr Gurney, " is bestowed upon us as rational crea- 
 " tures, it is not a matter of reason ; it is instinctive 
 " — the immediate gift of God. The law shines in 
 " the soul by its own uncreated light, and bears its 
 " own evidence. Like the axioms in mathematics, 
 " or the first truths in natural philosophy, it neither 
 " requires proof nor admits of it ; it consists of in- 
 " tuitive and unchanging principles." Page 54. I 
 am not about to enter here into the metaphysics of 
 this curious and somewhat difficult question, as to 
 the origin of our notions of right and wrong, and 
 moral obligation. What I am now at a loss about 
 is, the consistency of affirming any thing to be 
 
152 
 
 " instinctive ,, and " intuitive," and yet not natural, 
 but requiring, in order to the possession of it, the 
 immediate illumination of the Spirit of God ; the 
 consistency of affirming that such immediate illumi- 
 nation is necessary to the knowledge of God's law, 
 and, at the same time, that that law " shines in the 
 soul by its own uncreated light ;" of affirming any 
 of our instinctive and intuitive principles to be super- 
 naturally bestowed upon us, in virtue of the media- 
 tion of Jesus Christ, — and what is self-evident as 
 "the axioms in mathematics," to need more than 
 nature's powers to discover and discern it. The an- 
 cient and modern philosophers, whom Mr Gurney 
 quotes in support of his positions, had nothing in 
 their minds, when they spoke of the instinctive and 
 intuitive character of our notions of right and wrong, 
 beyond the light of nature^ — a light which, on the 
 present subject, Mr Gurney pronounces to be dark- 
 ness. Were it worth while to analyse the sentences 
 he quotes, we should find them all against him. The 
 very first of those philosophers, Dr Reid, says — 
 " The first principles of morals are immediate die- 
 " tates of the moral faculty, ," Now the moral faculty, 
 in Dr Reid's nomenclature, is conscience. But, ac- 
 cording to Mr Gurney, conscience, though admitted 
 to be a natural faculty, no more dictates moral prin- 
 ciples, than the eye produces the light by which it 
 sees, or than the judge enacts the law by which he 
 
153 
 
 decides. When Dr Reid further says — " The Su- 
 " preme Being has given us this light within to direct 
 " our moral conduct. It is the candle of the Lord, 
 " set up within us to guide our steps ;" — he still 
 means conscience : — but in Mr Gurney's theory- 
 conscience is not the candle, but the eye that sees 
 by means of it. The image, as used by Dr Reid, is 
 self-consistent ; every one understanding the " can- 
 " die set up within us to guide our steps/' as com- 
 prehending the joint existence of light and an eye to 
 use it. But the natural conscience of Mr G. is the 
 anomaly of an eye without light. 
 
 When Mr Gurney pronounces it impossible that 
 the light for which he pleads should be " inherent 
 by Jiature in the dark and corrupt mind of man," 
 a second question occurs : — does he mean by the 
 light any thing more than simple knowledge ? This, 
 it is evident, is all that is requisite, in order to 
 the operation of conscience. And it is equally 
 evident, that such knowledge may exist in any 
 mind, however morally corrupt and dark. A law 
 may be known, and yet hated; perfectly known and 
 perfectly hated. If, on the contrary, he means by 
 the light any right disposition of heart towards the 
 law, — the divine law, in its divine spirituality, — then. 
 I grant him his position that it belongs not to man's 
 fallen nature, but must be the product of God's en- 
 lightening and sanctifying Spirit. That he does in- 
 
154 
 
 elude something of this kind appears from his words 
 — " a manifestation of the divine law, accompanied 
 " with a portion of quickening and purifying power :" 
 Has every man, then, who is born into the world, a 
 portion of the quickening and purifying power of the 
 Holy Spirit? If so, it will follow, that, among all 
 the tribes of mankind, we are not in possession of 
 any fair specimen of the powers of unassisted nature, 
 in regard to the discovery of God and duty, and the 
 influence of what is thus discovered ; — that, forming 
 a judgment from the aggregate facts in the religious 
 history of the world, this universal divine communi- 
 cation of spiritual light and power, in virtue of the 
 Redeemer's mediation, has either been wonderfully 
 stinted, or as wonderfully inefficient; and that the 
 apostle's argument respecting the ground of the re- 
 sponsibility of the Gentiles is founded in a fallacy, — 
 inasmuch as, the knowledge of the law not being 
 attainable by nature, there can be none who " do by 
 nature the things contained in the law :" — for how 
 can they do by nature what they cannot know by 
 nature ? It cannot, with any propriety of speech, 
 be said, that they either know or do such things by 
 nature, when they are both known and done by the 
 immediate illumination and influence of the Spirit of 
 Christ. And, indeed, there is nothing that can more 
 satisfactorily evince the untenableness of Mr Gur- 
 ney's hypothesis on this subject, than the necessity 
 
LOO 
 
 to which it reduces him of confounding to such a 
 degree things that differ, as to advance the position, 
 that " when the apostle makes mention of the Gentiles 
 " performing the works of righteousness ' by nature,' 
 " he cannot be understood as alluding to nature unas- 
 " sisted by divine grace." Page 32, Note. If the apos- 
 tle does not allude to " nature unassisted by grace," 
 I should say he does not allude to nature at all. 
 Nature assisted by grace ceases to be nature. It 
 becomes something more, — something s^ernatural ; 
 and by combining in itself the very things contrasted, 
 it destroys the contrast ; for what are grace and na- 
 ture, if they do not mean the assisted and the unas- 
 sisted powers of man ? Yet Mr Gurney alleges, that 
 " the state of nature is placed in opposition, not to a 
 " state of grace, but only to one of outward light and 
 " instruction." Now that it is contrasted with a state 
 of outward light and instruction, is true ; but that 
 the absence of outward light and instruction is all 
 that is meant in the phrase " by nature" I cannot 
 admit. The supposition of immediate supernatural 
 inward light and instruction is surely just as incom- 
 patible with the idea of " a state of nature" as that 
 of outward light and instruction is. It depends, in- 
 deed, on the amount of this direct illumination of the 
 Spirit, whether it be not a superior privilege to the 
 mere possession of an external revelation. We can 
 readily enough conceive of its going so far, as even 
 
156 
 
 to surpass this in value. At all events, " by nature 1 
 cannot reasonably be understood as meaning by grace, 
 or, which is the same thing, by nature with super- 
 natural aid. Does the same phrase include any 
 thing of the kind, when Paul says elsewhere, " We 
 were by nature children of wrath, even as others ? " 
 His subsequent explanation teaches us the contrary : 
 " But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love 
 wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in 
 sins, hath quickened us together with Christ; (by 
 grace ye are saved ;) and hath raised us up together, 
 and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ 
 Jesus." Eph. ii. 4 — 6. Does not the apostle, in 
 these words, confine the idea of "grace" and " quick- 
 ening" to the dispensation of the gospel ? Does he 
 not warrant our considering a state of nature as, in 
 his phraseology, the proper contrast to a state of 
 grace, and not (as Mr Gurney's hypothesis makes it) 
 a state of grace itself? 
 
 It is an admitted rule in philosophy, that we should 
 not introduce more causes than are sufficient to ac- 
 count for the phenomena. The rule is of equally 
 legitimate authority in our investigations of the mo- 
 ral condition of intelligent creatures, as in those of 
 the physical constitution of the universe. Now, there 
 does not to me appear to be any thing in the apostle 
 Paul's statement regarding the Gentiles, that requires 
 more to account for it than what may fairly be con- 
 
157 
 
 sidered as belonging to every man by nature ; nothing 
 in it which renders it at all necessary to suppose a 
 direct and universal operation of the Holy Spirit : — ■ 
 and if so, that there is no need for having recourse 
 to an interpretation of the phrase "by nature' so 
 unnatural as that of Mr Gurney, — in which there is 
 so obvious a confounding of nature and grace. I 
 cannot but think, that Mr Gurney himself will see the 
 propriety of keeping nature and grace distinct, if the 
 apostle's representation can be satisfactorily explained 
 without confounding them. Now, surely, there is 
 no reason for our putting any stronger construction 
 on his representation of the Gentiles, as " doing by 
 nature the things contained in the law," than is ne- 
 cessary to the validity of his conclusions. Nothing, 
 then, can be more certain, than that by such terms 
 he does not mean that the Gentiles did all the things 
 contained in the law ; that they rendered it a com- 
 plete obedience, — that they fulfilled it. It were a 
 waste of time to prove this. No man in his sound 
 mind will question it. And if the terms are capa- 
 ble of one restriction, they are equally so of another : 
 — it is not at all necessary to the apostle's reasoning 
 to interpret them as implying that even of those 
 " things contained in the law " which the Gentiles by 
 nature do, any are done from such principles, or such 
 a state of heart, as to render the doing of them truly 
 good and acceptable in the sight of God. To this, 
 o 
 
158 
 
 the true love of God is indispensable ; and to the 
 true love of God, the true knowledge of him. It is 
 quite enough for the apostle's argument, that, in their 
 conduct, in the " witness-bearing" of their " con- 
 sciences," and in their "reasonings'' (koy^y^v) on 
 morals and jurisprudence, the Gentiles evince a sense 
 of right and wrong, — convictions in their minds of 
 sin and duty, — with any corresponding approbation 
 or disapprobation, self-satisfaction or remorse, when, 
 by their neighbours or by themselves, the one or the 
 other has been done. " When at any time, any 
 " amongst them, in any part of their conduct, pay 
 " regard to the claims of humanity and justice, of 
 " natural affection and of general benevolence, in 
 " opposition to the influence of contrary principles, 
 " they make it apparent that, although without the 
 " written law, they ' are a law unto themselves, and 
 " 'show the work of the law written in their hearts.' 
 " There the law of God was originally written ; and 
 " although, by the fall, the impression of the divine 
 " hand-writing has been mournfully defaced and cor- 
 " rupted, yet it has never been entirely obliterated. 
 " In regard, indeed, to right dispositions of heart, — 
 " to the principles of godliness, — to truly spiritual 
 " and holy desires and affections, the obliteration is 
 " complete ; no traces of the original characters re- 
 " main. But the law itself has not been thoroughly 
 " erased from the mind, however entirely the heart 
 
159 
 
 " may have lost the disposition to keep it. The er- 
 " roneousness and debasement of the conceptions of 
 " moral good and evil prevalent among the heathen, 
 " have arisen from the very same cause to which the 
 " apostle traces their ignorance of God himself. The 
 " source of their dislike to the only true God was, 
 " the opposition of his pure and holy character to 
 " the pollutions of their fallen nature. And we need 
 " not surely wonder, that the same depravity should 
 " have produced, as far as the remaining light and 
 " power of reason would admit, the perversion and 
 " partial oblivion of that law, which is ' holy and just 
 " and good,' — condemning their trespasses, working 
 " wrath, and filling them with a ' fearful looking-for 
 " of judgment.' By all such voluntary erasement of 
 " the law of God from their minds, deep guilt has 
 " been contracted. But still, the original impression 
 " is not gone."* — The inward workings and outward 
 indications of conscience ; — the entire procedure of 
 heathen courts of justice ; — the moral writings of 
 some of their most eminent philosophers ; — the rea- 
 sonings of suspected or accused transgressors, to 
 maintain their characters by clearing themselves of 
 the imputation of crime, or by excusing and palli- 
 
 * Sermons on Man's Accountableness for his Belief, and the 
 Responsibility of the Heathen, pages 53, 54. To this small 
 volume the author must refer the reader for a more enlarged 
 exposition of his views on this very interesting subject. 
 
 o2 
 
160 
 
 ating their culpable conduct; — along with various 
 other evidences, all concur to prove the existence of 
 what has been termed the law of nature. And to 
 my own mind it appears abundantly clear, that no- 
 thing more than nature is necessary to account for 
 all the phenomena ; and that to interpret nature in 
 the apostle's reasoning, as meaning nature assisted 
 by grace, is to confound things that differ, as well as 
 to introduce a cause of which the operation is not at 
 all required, 
 
 And this leads me to observe, still farther, that the 
 charge of confounding things that differ applies with 
 no less force to the identification, in kind though not 
 in degree, of the blessing thus bestowed upon the 
 heathen with that promised in the new covenant, 
 and enjoyed by the spiritual subjects of that cov- 
 enant : — " I will put my law in their inward parts, 
 and write it in their hearts." " This law of God 
 " written in the heart," says Mr Gurney, " can be 
 " nothing less than a divine illumination ; and the 
 -' larger measures of such illumination are described 
 " in the very same terms, as one of the choicest 
 " blessings of the Christian dispensation : Jer. xxxi. 
 " 33." Page 32, Note. — This is surprising. In the 
 passage on which we have been commenting — Rom, 
 ii. 14, 15. — the apostle is contrasting the condition 
 of the Jews who had the written law, with that of the 
 Gentiles who had it not. Now the possession by the 
 
161 
 
 Jews of the written law was the possession simply of 
 the means of knowing the divine will. The possession, 
 as the entire context shows, has no reference what- 
 ever to the state of the heart, — and implies nothing 
 of any right disposition towards that will. If the 
 contrast, therefore, be at all fair, what is said of the 
 Gentiles must also have a simple reference to the 
 means of knowing the divine will possessed by them. 
 It must not be considered as inclusive of moral dis- 
 position. For to interpret it thus, would introduce 
 on the one side of the contrast what has no place in 
 the other; it would set it at variance with the entire 
 description of the practical character of the Gentile 
 world ; and it would, moreover,: — contrary to the 
 whole spirit and scope of the apostle's reasoning, — 
 assign to the Gentiles a higher privilege than that set 
 in contrast with it as bestowed upon the Jews. The 
 Jews had the written law, — the law in the Book: — 
 but if the Gentiles, who had not that law, had the 
 law in the heart, in the same sense in which this 
 blessing is promised in the new covenant, although 
 not in the same degree, — who will deny that they 
 had a privilege of higher value ; inferior means of 
 knowledge with a right disposition of heart, being, 
 beyond question, more excellent than a superior 
 measure of the former without the latter. I proceed 
 on the assumption of what Mr Gurney will not dis- 
 pute, that the terms of promise in the new covenant 
 o 3 
 
162 
 
 do include disposition as well as knowledge, — or, in 
 other words, the "new heart" and " new spirit/' the 
 " heart of flesh" that comes in the room of the " stony- 
 heart," — which are elsewhere specified as the bless- 
 ings of the same covenant. — That the contrast in the 
 passage relates to the means of knowledge, is further 
 evident from the very object which the apostle has in 
 view, which is to establish the principle that respon- 
 sibility is according to privilege ; and that, " in the 
 day when God shall judge the secrets of men by 
 Jesus Christ," the truth of the position he had just 
 laid down, — that " there is no respect of persons 
 with God," — would be manifested in the fact of the 
 judgment being conducted upon that principle:— 
 " As many as have sinned without law shall also per- 
 ish without law ; and as many as have sinned in the 
 law shall be judged by the law." But this can have 
 no reference to disposition, or state of heart ; inas- 
 much as that forms no part of the standard or rule 
 of judgment, but of the character to which the stan- 
 dard or rule is to be applied. — When God, in the 
 new covenant, the spiritual covenant of the gospel, 
 gives the gracious promise, " I will put my laws in 
 their minds and in their hearts will I write them," he 
 promises what is essentially regeneration ; not only 
 a mind to know, but a heart to love, his law, — even 
 that law of which the first precept demands supreme 
 love to himself. To suppose " every man born into 
 
163 
 
 the world " a possessor, by the direct influence of the 
 Holy Spirit, of this new covenant blessing, is to sup- 
 pose " every man born into the world," to the extent 
 in which he does possess it, a regenerate or new T man ! 
 How far this is in accordance with the very plainest 
 representations of Scripture — " judge ye." 
 
 I cannot help thinking, that Mr Gurney ascribes 
 to the law, and to the knowledge of the law, effects 
 which, according to apostolic statement, it is not fit- 
 ted to produce. He says — " The conscience, indeed* 
 ;t like every other faculty of the human mind, is prone 
 " to perversion, and the law written in the heart is 
 " given, not only to enlighten but to rectify it." 
 Page 33. Now, whence is it, that the conscience is 
 "prone to perversion?" It is owing to the state of 
 the heart. In order, therefore, to its being " recti- 
 fied," that which perverts it must be rectified. If by 
 the " law written in the heart," Mr Gurney intends 
 such a writing as includes the rectification of the 
 heart, or the impartation to it of a right disposition 
 towards the law, his position is indeed correct ; but 
 then, he is embarrassed by all the difficulties we have 
 just been mentioning. And if by the " law written 
 in the heart" he means no more than the knowledge 
 of the law, then will it not be easy to reconcile his 
 position, that it is given to rectify the conscience, 
 with the tendency of such knowledge, operating on 
 human corruption, as stated by the inspired apostle 
 
164 
 
 Paul. According to him, it works rebellion, and 
 works wrath. — It works rebellion, — the authoritative 
 restrictions and prohibitions of the law fretting and 
 irritating, and stimulating to resistance, the latent 
 principles of corruption. Hence he speaks of " the 
 motions of sins which were by the law, working in 
 the members" of those who are still " in the flesh," 
 " to bring forth fruit unto death ;" and of " sin, tak- 
 ing occasion by the commandment, working in him- 
 self," when he was yet unregenerate, " all manner of 
 concupiscence." — Audit "works wrath;" because 
 " by the law is the knowledge of sin :" — so that the 
 clearer and fuller the knowledge of the law, the 
 clearer and fuller will be the sinner's knowledge and 
 consciousness of the amount of his guilt, and the 
 more vivid and alarming his apprehensions of the 
 coming wrath. To sinners, as all mankind are, the 
 law is " the ministration of condemnation." Fear 
 and death are its attendants. There is no grace in 
 it, and no hope. It can hardly be a privilege to 
 know it, unless with that knowledge there comes also 
 the knowledge of the way of salvation. And to me 
 it appears a very preposterous thing, to represent 
 that which " worketh wrath," as, by itself, one of the 
 benefits of the Redeemer's mediation ! * 
 
 I should now call your attention, and especially 
 
 * See Note at the end of this Letter. 
 
165 
 
 that of Mr Gurney himself, to the bearing of the view 
 taken by him of the meaning of the apostle's words 
 in Rom. ii. on the gospel doctrine of justification. 
 This, however, is a subject of such paramount im- 
 portance, that I mean to assign to it a distinct letter, 
 — perhaps more. — Meanwhile, entreating Mr Gur- 
 ney 's forgiveness if, in any point, I have unwittingly 
 misrepresented his sentiments, or deduced from them 
 any conclusions which are not legitimate, I remain, 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 R. \Y\ 
 
166 
 
 NOTE referred to towards the close of the preceding Letter. 
 
 The Responsibility of the Heathen is a subject of the deep- 
 est interest, — the discussion of it involving that of the great prin- 
 ciples of the divine government. I have referred the reader for 
 my views of this subject, to a separate publication. From that 
 little volume I may here present an extract or two; from which, 
 though imperfectly, he may form a judgment of the principles 
 maintained in it, and compare them, not merely with his own, 
 but with the dictates of the Sacred volume ; our harmony in 
 sentiment with each other being, comparatively, of little mo- 
 ment, — but our agreement with God being of the last import- 
 ance ; that we may not be found either " charging Him fool- 
 ishly," or " vindicating his ways" on principles which have not 
 the sanction of his word. 
 
 " To come at once to the text of our discourse. I can con- 
 ceive to myself nothing plainer : — c As many as have sinned 
 without law, shall also perish without law ; and as many as have 
 sinned in the law, shall be judged by the law.' " 
 
 " Nor is it in the text only that these principles are recog- 
 nised. The spirit of them pervades the whole of the sacred 
 volume ; and in many places of it they are affirmed with no less 
 explicitness than in the words before us. For example : Luke 
 xii. 47, 48. * And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and 
 prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be 
 beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did com- 
 mit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For 
 unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required ; 
 and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask 
 the more.' — John ix. 39 — 41. * And Jesus said, For judgment I 
 am come into this world, that they which see not might see, and 
 that they which see might be made blind. And some of the 
 Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto 
 him, Are we blind also ? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, 
 ye should have no sin : but now ye say, We see ; therefore your 
 sin remaineth. , — John xv. 22 — 24. * If I had not come and 
 
167 
 
 spoken unto them, they had not had sin : but now they have no 
 cloak for their sin. He that hateth me, hateth my Father also. 
 If I had not done among them the works which none other man 
 did, they had not had sin : but now have they both seen and 
 hated both me and my Father.' — Matth. xi. 20 — 24. ■ Then 
 began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works 
 were done, because they repented not. Woe unto thee, Cho- 
 razin ! woe unto thee, Bethsaida ! for if the mighty works which 
 were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would 
 have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto 
 you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of 
 judgment than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art ex- 
 alted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell : for if the 
 mighty works which have been done in thee had been done in 
 Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto 
 you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in 
 the day of judgment, than for thee.' 
 
 " From these and other passages, we lay it down, without 
 hesitation, as the doctrine of Scripture, as it is also the evident 
 dictate of reason, — that responsibility is according to privilege, 
 — that the punishment of offences by the judgment of a right- 
 eous God, will be exactly proportionate to the extent in which 
 the means have been enjoyed of the knowledge both of duty and 
 of the obligations to its performance." 
 
 " If the Bible condemned men for their ignorance of what 
 they never heard of, — for not receiving a revelation which they 
 had no opportunity of knowing, — for not obeying a law which 
 never was promulgated to them, — for failing to accept a mes- 
 sage of mercy which never reached their ears ; — the objection I 
 am considering would be more than plausible; it would be valid, 
 — it would be insurmountable. It would be far more than diffi- 
 cult, — it would be utterly impossible, on any sound principles, 
 £ to vindicate the ways of God to men.' The Book that con- 
 tained such principles could not come from Him who is i a God 
 of truth, and without iniquity.' — But indeed it is not so. The 
 representation is an impious slander on the Bible. No such 
 
168 
 
 principles of unrighteousness are any where to be found in it. 
 And I would again put it to the conscience and the candour of 
 any infidel, whether a fairer principle can be imagined than that 
 which is laid down in the text and in the other passages that 
 have been quoted ? In conducting judgment on such a prin- 
 ciple, does not the blessed God fully sustain the character which 
 the same Book gives of him— 4 Just and right is He ?' Sin he 
 hates, and is determined to punish. He has published the de- 
 termination. But he has, at the same time, assured us, that he 
 will weigh, in an even balance, all extenuating as well as all 
 aggravating circumstances, and pronounce his judicial sentences 
 accordingly. — And what more than this can any reasonable man 
 desire? So far from being a ground of objection and cavil, 
 ought not the explicit recognition of such a principle, as the 
 rule by which the divine procedure is to be regulated, to recom- 
 mend the Book which contains it, as giving just and worthy views 
 of * the righteous Lord, who loveth righteousness T " 
 
 " 1 have thus endeavoured to show you the principles, accord- 
 ing to which, the Scriptures assure us, the judgments of the Di- 
 vine Tribunal are to be conducted. And I wish to impress it 
 strongly on your minds, that beyond the ascertaining of princi- 
 ples it is not ours to go. We dare not attempt it. If you ask 
 me to apply these principles, I am silent, and resolute in silence. 
 This is beyond our legitimate province. It would be an arrogant 
 and impious assumption of a prerogative exclusively divine. If 
 you begin, therefore, to name individuals, and to press me with 
 inquiries what is to become of them — I have but one reply: — 
 You are going beyond your limits. You are not the judges. 
 You know not enough of the cases and the characters, — not 
 even of any one case or character, — to fit you for such decision. 
 It is enough for you to be assured of the principles of judgment, 
 and of the application of these principles being in the hands of 
 an omniscient, unerring, independent, and impartial Judge. 
 There you must leave all questions as to individuals ' The 
 Judge of all the earth will do only that which is right' No 
 one, you may surely rest satisfied, shall find any ground of com- 
 
169 
 
 plaint at the Tribunal of ' the Holy One and the Just.' Is the 
 amount of your confidence in God (I again ask you) so very 
 small, that you cannot trust him for this ? — that you will not be 
 satisfied with the explicit declaration of principles, but will in- 
 sist on his disclosing to you the results of their application to 
 individual characters, or on his endowing you with omniscience, 
 to enable you to make this application yourselves? 
 
 " But a heavy load, I will suppose, after all that has been said, 
 still presses upon your minds ; you still urge the anxious in- 
 quiry — But may not the Heathen be saved ? Is their salvation, 
 icithout the knowledge of revelation, impossible ? Is there no hope 
 for them ? 
 
 u I have no wish to dismiss such questions lightly. It would 
 >how a want of all becoming sensibility, not to participate in the 
 solicitude which they express. In attempting any reply to them, 
 I must begin by inquiring, — What do you mean when you ask, 
 1 May not the heathen be saved ?' — There is a vagueness in the 
 question, of which, possibly, you are not sensible. — When you 
 -ay, May not the heathen be saved ? — do you mean to ask whe- 
 ther all the heathen may be saved, whatever have been their 
 principles, and whatever their character ? I will not suppose 
 you can mean this. It would be an insult to your good sense. 
 The doctrine that would make salvation independent of present 
 principles and present character in the case of the heathen, must 
 of necessity, (if those who maintain it would be consistent with 
 themselves) make salvation independent of principles and char- 
 acter as to all mankind. And with a doctrine such as this, — if 
 any shall be found so foolish and so presumptuous as to entertain 
 it, — we have at present nothing to do. 
 
 u Again, then, I ask — Do you mean by the question, whether, 
 if a heathen can be found, who has thought, and felt, and acted, 
 fully up to the light which he has enjoyed, — who has in every 
 thing lived agreeably to that light, whatever the measure of it 
 may have been, — whether that heathen may be saved ? — then I 
 answer, without the hesitation of a moment, Yes — most assur- 
 edly. The text clearly implies it. We know that if those who 
 had the law kept the law perfectly, then they would have been 
 
 P 
 
170 
 
 saved by it ; for the Scripture expressly saith, < The man that 
 doeth these things shall live by them.' Such persons would have 
 been sinless in their circumstances;— and if any one of those who 
 are * without law ' were found sinless in his circumstances, he 
 could not perish ; for the text lays down the principle, that it is 
 only such as have sinned, in whatever circumstances, that shall 
 perish. It clearly follows, that if a heathen be found, who has, 
 in all respects, lived according to the light he has enjoyed, he 
 shall not perish. Point out the man, and we have divine autho- 
 rity for pronouncing him safe. The doctrine of the text is, that 
 he is to be judged according to his circumstances, — « according 
 to what he hath, and not according to what he hath not : ' — in 
 the case supposed, he comes up to this test: — he cannot, there- 
 fore, be condemned, — he cannot perish. 
 
 " But there is still another question : — Even those who believe 
 the gospel are not by the faith of it perfectly freed from sin ; 
 they are only delivered from its predominant power, from the 
 love and the indulgence of it; so that, with various degrees of 
 remaining corruption, prevailing holiness becomes their distin- 
 guishing character: — is your meaning, then, whether, if a hea- 
 then were to be found, understanding and believing those views 
 of God which nature teaches, — humbly and seriously feeling their 
 influence, — and living accordingly, — not a life, as in the former 
 supposition, of sinless conformity to his principles, but, as in the 
 case of the christian believer, a life of such predominant good- 
 ness as the lessons which he actually has, the truths which he 
 has learned from the volume of nature, are fitted to produce ; — 
 whether, if such a man were found, he might not be saved ? — I 
 freely answer, I am not prepared to deny that he might. And if 
 any shall think these terms, in such a case, unduly cautious and 
 measured, — I will go a step further, and say, the spirit of the text 
 appears to imply, if its words do not directly express, a principle 
 that would warrant our answering this question too in the affirm- 
 ative. — Divine instruction is contained, if I may so express my- 
 self, in two volumes, — the volume of nature, and the volume of 
 revelation. The text expressly declares, — what accords with the 
 dictates of reason and with every natural sentiment of justice, — 
 
171 
 
 that they who are not in possession of the latter are not to be 
 judged by it. If, therefore, any one can be found, who learns 
 aright what is taught in the only volume he has, and who is rightly 
 and habitually, though not perfectly, influenced by what he learns, 
 — (for to insist on the perfection of such influence would, as I 
 have just before noticed, be to require more than is required in 
 the case of the believer of the lessons of the other volume, the 
 volume of revelation) — I see not, in such a case, how either the 
 spirit or the letter of my text could justify me in affirming his 
 condemnation ; — for then, in opposition to what the text so 
 plainly teaches us, his sentence would proceed on the ground of 
 his not being influenced by what he had no opportunity to know. 
 
 " In granting, however, this general position, I must request 
 the special attention of my hearers, to the following observations, 
 as its necessary qualifying accompaniments : — 
 
 " In the Jirst place : I repeat, as of particular consequence to 
 be borne in mind, I am only laying down principles. With the 
 personal application of these principles I have nothing to do. 
 That, as I have said, must rest in a higher quarter. — in the hands 
 of the only competent Judge. In my present reasonings, all is 
 hypothetical, //"such a person is to be found, we may entertain 
 good hopes of his future well-being. 
 
 " Secondly : The supposition of such a person's salvation is 
 not by any means to the exclusion, in the hypothetical case, of 
 either the influences of the Spirit of God, or the virtue of the 
 Redeemer s atonement. — With regard to the former; since both 
 the volume of nature and the volume of revelation are divine, 
 there is surely nothing either inconceivable or incongruous in the 
 idea of the Holy Spirit operating on the minds of men by the 
 truths contained in the one, as well as by those contained in the 
 other. The truths indeed of the former volume are truths which 
 are assumed and repeated in the latter, — although the principal 
 lessons of the latter are discoveries peculiar to itself, beyond 
 those of the former, and far transcending them in interest and 
 glory. But still, the Spirit of God may, without the slightest 
 inconsistency or disparagement, be conceived to impart his in- 
 fluence for giving the right discernment and the proper efficacy 
 
 P 2 
 
172 
 
 of those lessons that are common to nature and revelation, as well 
 as of those which are peculiar to the latter. When the New 
 Testament dispensation is distinguished as the ' ministration of 
 the Spirit,' — and when such language is used as, ' the Holy 
 Spirit was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glori- 
 fied, 5 — we are not to understand, that there was no Divine influ- 
 ence previous to the fulness of time and the clear discoveries of 
 the gospel ; but only that, under the gospel, the degreee of that 
 influence was to be so extraordinary and unprecedented, as to 
 form a distinctive characteristic of the new era. Both the mi- 
 raculous power and saving energy of the Spirit were in requisi- 
 tion from the beginning, for giving evidence and efficacy to the 
 truth of God. But when Christ had finished his work, — when 
 he ' ascended on high leading captivity captive, and received 
 gifts for men,' the effusion was beyond all example abundant in 
 its measure, and glorious in its effects. — On the same principle, 
 when we speak of the Spirit operating by the truths of revela- 
 tion, it might be meant, not that his operation was exclusively or 
 without exception by their instrumentality, but only in a degree 
 and with a frequency so transcendently superior, as to be fairly 
 and strikingly distinctive and characteristic. The truths taught 
 by nature are also taught by revelation : and the question is, 
 whether, as taught by nature, that is, by themselves, unconnected 
 with the peculiar discoveries of the inspired volume, God has 
 ever been pleased to honour them with the accompaniment of 
 his Spirit, and so to make them the instrumental means of spir- 
 itual benefit to the souls of men. And on this question I would 
 by no means venture to affirm any thing with confidence. Whilst 
 the supposition involves nothing either impossible or unworthy of 
 the Divine Agent, — yet it may be regarded as at least dubious in 
 point of fact, whether the Spirit ever does make use of the 
 truths taught by the light of nature alone, for renewing hearts, 
 and bringing erring men back to God. When the apostle says, 
 — < After that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew 
 not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save 
 them that believe,' his language certainly favours the contrary 
 supposition. It seems to intimate, that it was God's design, to 
 
173 
 
 give a full and fair trial to the unassisted powers of human rea- 
 son : and the trial, during the whole period of it, and over all 
 the extent of its field, having issued in a total failure, then he 
 comes forward with his new instrument, the peculiar discoveries 
 of the gospel, the doctrines of the cross. These he accompa- 
 nies with his spiritual agency, and proves them to be, though 
 foolishness in the eyes of the wise men of this world, ' the 
 power of God unto salvation.' — Still, however, on the principles 
 above mentioned, this and similar passages might signify not the 
 absolute exclusion, but only the very great rarity, of divine influ- 
 ence accompanying the truths in the volume of nature. I do 
 not think that inspired authority pronounces any unqualified 
 decision of the question. 
 
 " With regard again to the atonement of Christ, the question 
 comes to be, whether there be any impossibility or contradiction 
 in the supposition of its saving virtue extending to any who are 
 necessarily ignorant of it ? I hold it as a scriptural principle, in 
 regard to our apostate world, that * there is no salvation in any 
 other' than the revealed Mediator; and tjiat all consequently 
 who are finally saved must owe their salvation to his atonement 
 and intercession. The whole countless multitude of the re- 
 deemed shall sing one song — ' Salvation to our God who sitteth 
 upon the throne, and unto the Lamb!' Personal worthiness, and 
 self-salvation, will have no place in the thoughts of any one mind 
 in that vast assembly. i Christ will be all, and in all.' But 
 the question is, whether the merits of Christ can, in any case, 
 extend, in their saving virtue, beyond the actual knowledge of 
 him? And in answer to this question, the case of infants imme- 
 diately presents itself. We believe the mediation of Christ to 
 be available to their salvation, although they are incapable of 
 knowing, understanding, and believing the divine testimony. 
 There is a close parallelism between their case and that of the 
 Heathen ; — the sole difference being, that in the one the ignor- 
 ance arises from incapacity, and in the other from situation; and 
 these, where the situation is not the result of choice, are, in all 
 that affects moral responsibility, evidently on a level. 
 
 " Still, however, let it not be forgotten, all this is hypothetical 
 
 p3 
 
174 
 
 Of particular facts, or of the salvation of individuals, we can 
 affirm nothing. We only say — If — if such persons have existed, 
 or do exist. 
 
 " I recur to the general position, that the principle of judgment 
 laid down in the text is that of perfect unimpeachable equity, 
 and repeat my appeal for this to the understanding and con- 
 science of every hearer. If you are satisfied of the rectitude of 
 the principle, leave the Heathen (for surely you may do so with 
 confidence) in the hands of that Supreme Judge, who has an- 
 nounced this as the unalterable law of his procedure, and who, 
 in its impartial application, will do none of his creatures wrong. 
 Be thankful for the discovery of the principle, and intrust the 
 application of it to him. To such confidence he is entitled. It 
 is fearful impiety to withhold it." 
 
LETTER V. 
 
 ON THE GOSPEL DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION, 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 The subject with which, in the close of 
 my last letter, I proposed to open this, is one, as then 
 stated, of paramount importance. All men are sin- 
 ners : — that is, they are transgressors of the divine 
 law ; for " sin is the transgression of the law," and 
 " where no law is, there is no transgression," As 
 sinners, or transgressors of the law, all are under the 
 law's sentence of condemnation — " Cursed is every 
 one that continueth not in all things written in the 
 book of the law, to do them :" — " The soul that sin- 
 neth, it shall die." In these circumstances, there 
 cannot be an inquiry of more momentous interest, 
 than the inquiry how sinners may obtain forgiveness, 
 and find acceptance with God? — To furnish a satis- 
 factory answer to this inquiry is one of the first de- 
 signs of the Gospel. Leaving for subsequent consid- 
 eration the question, how far the views of Mr Gurney 
 respecting the answer w 7 hich the gospel does give to 
 
176 
 
 it are in harmony with those of other Quaker writers, 
 and of Friends in general, it is with his views that I 
 have now, in the first instance, to do: — and it is with 
 no ordinary satisfaction that I introduce them, as 
 being, substantially, so coincident with what I con- 
 ceive to be the doctrines of the inspired volume. It 
 is with delight, indeed, that I enrich my pages with 
 the following brief citations from the midst of much 
 more that is equally excellent. 
 
 After quoting portions of that admirable exposition 
 of the ceremonial law, the epistle to the Hebrews, he 
 says : — " On a " fair examination of these luminous 
 " passages, it seems impossible not to confess, on the 
 " one hand, that the sacrifices of the law were, in their 
 " nature, weak and unprofitable ; and, on the other 
 " hand, that in the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 " there was a real efficacy for the blotting out of all in- 
 " iquity. While, however, we heartily acknowledge 
 " this blessed truth, and, under a sense of our own 
 " vileness, gratefully avail ourselves of the ' blood of 
 u the everlasting covenant' as the only atonement for 
 " our sins, we ought to exercise a holy caution, lest 
 " our sentiments on this subject should degenerate into 
 " unscriptural and merely heathenish notions of expi- 
 i( atory sacrifice" * — Admirably does he guard against 
 these, and at the same time, vindicate the doctrine of 
 
 * Essays on the Evidences, Doctrines, and practical operation 
 of Christianity, pages 414, 415, Essay XI. 
 

 
 177 
 
 atonement from the false aspersions thrown upon it 
 by its Socinian adversaries, as implying the vindic- 
 tiveness and implacability of the divine nature — 
 " Christians have not unfrequently been accused of 
 " assuming, as the foundation of their doctrine of 
 " atonement, the natural implacability of God towards 
 " man ; and of holding the notion that God was ren- 
 " dered placable by the involuntary sufferings of a 
 " harmless, unoffending substitute. That such and 
 " similar statements of the opinions of Christians are, 
 " for the most part, gross misrepresentations, and that 
 " no such views have ever been entertained by any 
 " reflecting or consistent theologian, I am fully per- 
 " suaded. Be that as it may, however, these unques- 
 " tionably are not the views of the atonement pre- 
 u sented to us in the Bible. There we plainly learn, 
 u that the incarnation, humiliation, sufferings, and 
 " propitiatory sacrifice, of Christ, were ordained by 
 " the Father himself, as the means through which, 
 " in his own infinite knowledge and wisdom, he saw 
 " fit to provide for the satisfaction of his justice, and 
 " at the same time for the pardon and restoration of 
 " a lost and sinful race of his creatures. And these 
 " eternal counsels were so far from being the effect of 
 " any essential implacability in the mind of God, — ■ 
 " that the divine attribute to which they are uni- 
 " formly ascribed in Scripture, is the very opposite 
 " of such a quality. It is placability: it is mercy: it 
 
178 
 
 a is love. ' God so loved the world that he gave his 
 " only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him 
 " should not perish but have everlasting life.' John 
 " iii. 16. ' God is love.' ' In this was manifested 
 " the love of God toward us, because that God sent 
 " his only begotten Son into the world, that we might 
 "live through him.' 1 John iv. 8, 9."* — Again: 
 " Now, although a crucified Redeemer is thus clearly 
 " revealed to us as the appointed channel of the 
 " mercies of God to man, such is the perverseness 
 " of our hearts that we are naturally prone to reject 
 " him, and even to account the ' blood of the cove- 
 " nant an unholy thing.' As it was in the days of 
 " the Apostle Paul, so it is now — Christ crucified 
 " offends the pride of the Jew, and mortifies the false 
 " wisdom of the Greek : 1 Cor. i. 23. How many 
 " persons are there, whose self-righteousness is far 
 " too little broken down to admit of their accepting 
 " that divine plan of redemption which involves their 
 " own total humiliation, inasmuch as it assumes that 
 " they are justly liable to the divine displeasure, ab- 
 " solutely devoid of merit, and destitute of all capa- 
 " city to be saved, except through the righteousness 
 " of another /" j- — And in the following passages, the 
 imputation of this righteousness to the believing sin- 
 ner, for his justification before God, is maintained 
 
 * Ibid, pages 415, 416. f Ibid, pages 419, 420. 
 
179 
 
 with unequivocal clearness : — M It is a position very 
 " plainly laid down by the apostle Paul, that we are 
 "justified by faith in Christ without the deeds ofthelaic, 
 " Rom. iii. 28. or in other words (elsewhere adopted 
 " by him) that i without works,' righteousness is 
 " imputed to the believer in Jesus, Rom. iv. 6, 11. 
 " Now, on a comparison of this position with other 
 " scriptural declarations, of some of which the apostle 
 " is himself the author, it is easy to perceive, that 
 " the righteousness imputed to the Christian is no 
 " imaginary innocence and virtue, but the righteous- 
 " ness of the Lord Jesus Christ himself: for it is 
 " Jesus who is described by the prophets as i the 
 " Lord our righteousness,' Jer. xxiii. 6. comp. Isa. 
 " xlv. 24, 25. Christ Jesus is made unto us, of the 
 " Father, righteousness and redemption, 1 Cor. i. 30. 
 " ' God hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew 
 " no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of 
 " God in him,' 2 Cor. v. 21."*— And, when he has 
 explained wherein the righteousness of Christ con- 
 sists, he thus proceeds — and this quotation must suf- 
 fice : — " Such was the righteousness of the Lord 
 " Jesus Christ; and such is the righteousness, there- 
 " fore, which, through faith, is imputed to the Chris- 
 " tian. A very slight degree of reflexion on the 
 " divine nature and infinite dignity of the Son of 
 
 * Ibid, pages 423, 424. 
 
180/ 
 
 i - 
 
 * c God, as well as on the perfection of his human 
 " character, may serve to convince us, that, as on the 
 " one hand, he was, on account of his spotless inno- 
 4 ' cence, entirely suited to be a sacrifice for sin, so, 
 " on the other hand, his fulfilment of the moral law, 
 ** and more especially his obedience unto death, were 
 • ; infinitely meritorious in the sight of God the Fa- 
 " ther. When, therefore, we read that the righteous- 
 " ness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the believer, we 
 u may reasonably understand such a doctrine to im- 
 " port that we are not only saved through the sacri- 
 " lice of Jesus Christ, but rewarded through his mer- 
 " its. Our sinfulness may properly be said to have 
 V been imputed to Christ, because, when he under- 
 " went the penalty which that sinfulness demanded, 
 " he was dealt with as if he had been himself the 
 " sinner ; and it is, I apprehend, on a perfectly ana- 
 '** logous principle, that his righteousness is said to 
 " be imputed to us ; because, through the boundless 
 " mercy of God, we are permitted to reap the fruits 
 ci of it. We are regarded as if, like him, we were 
 iC absolutely guiltless, and are, therefore, delivered 
 * 4 from everlasting punishment. We are graciously 
 " accepted, as if, like him, we had meritoriously ful- 
 u filled the whole law of God, and are, therefore, 
 u rewarded with never-ending felicity. Thus it is, 
 " that, in consequence of his union, through faith, 
 " with Jesus, the Head of the church, the Christian 
 
181 
 
 u is not only protected from the pains of hell, bat is 
 " in possession of a well-grounded claim on the joys 
 ;i of heaven. Thus it is that grace ' reigns through 
 " righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our 
 "Lord;'" Rom. v. 21.* 
 
 I said that this quotation must suffice ; but there 
 is yet another, which I am constrained to make, be- 
 cause of the clear light in which it places the dis- 
 tinction between the believer's justification and his 
 sanctification, a distinction sufficiently manifest to 
 the attentive reader of the Scriptures, but one which 
 previous Quaker writers have been strangely prone 
 to confound; a proneness, of which both the fact and 
 the cause may be noticed before the close of this or of 
 next letter : — " On the whole, then, it is plain and un- 
 " deniable, that the Spirit of truth and righteousness 
 " is bestowed upon mankind, through the sole media- 
 " tion of Jesus Christ. And now, in bringing this 
 u point of our subject to its conclusion, I would ven- 
 " ture to entreat the reader's attention to the close 
 " and intimate association subsisting between two 
 u great doctrines of Christianity ; which may indeed 
 u be rightly distinguished, but can never be rightly 
 u separated — justification through the blood of Christ, 
 " and sanctification through his Spirit. In Scripture, 
 " these doctrines are very generally treated of con- 
 
 * Ibid, pages 425, 426, 
 Q. 
 
182 
 
 "jointly. Both are represented by the sacred writers 
 " as essential to the work of salvation : both as ori- 
 i( ginating in the boundless mercy of the Father ; 
 " and both as arising immediately out of the sacrifice 
 " of the Son of God. Was Christ < set forth ' of the 
 " Father, * to be a propitiation through faith in his 
 " blood ?' Did he ' bear our sins in his own body 
 " on the tree ?' Did he thus * give himself for us ?' 
 " It was not only for the remission of sins that are 
 " past, and for the justification of penitent believers, 
 " but also that he might ' sanctify and cleanse' his 
 " church ; that he might ' redeem us from all ini- 
 i( quity;' that our conscience might be ' purged from 
 "dead works to serve the living God;' that 'we, 
 " being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness ;' 
 " Heb. ix. 14. 1 Pet. ii. 24. It is much to be de- 
 " sired, that a holy caution should more and more 
 " prevail among Christians, lest, by dwelling on 
 " either of these doctrines, to the exclusion of the 
 " other, they should lose the balance of divine truth ; 
 " for, although persons who are accustomed to com- 
 " mit this dangerous practical error, may participate 
 " in some of the joys, and experience some of the 
 " virtue, of true religion, they cannot fail to fall very 
 " short of a just apprehension and satisfying enjoy- 
 " ment of the beauty, the harmony, and the com- 
 " pleteness, of the gospel dispensation."* 
 
 * Ibid, pages 443, 444. 
 
183 
 
 When 1 read such sentiments as those which this 
 and preceding extracts contain ; and when I find 
 the same writer, after an admirable summary of the 
 scriptural evidence in support of our Lord's divinity, 
 concluding in these explicit and solemn terms — " For 
 i( my own part, I may venture to acknowledge a firm 
 " conviction (grounded on long-continued study and 
 " reflexion) that I must either give up the inspiration 
 " of Scripture, and with it, perhaps, the truth of 
 " Christianity itself, or allow the absolute and eternal 
 " divinity of Jesus Christ. In choosing my alterna- 
 " tive, I cannot, for a moment hesitate; for as, on the 
 " one hand, the inspiration of Scripture and the 
 " truth of Christianity rest on a basis which the pro- 
 " foundest thought and widest investigation serve 
 " only to establish, so, on the other hand, the glori- 
 " ous doctrine of ' God manifest in the flesh,' although, 
 " as to its mode, deeply mysterious, will ever be con- 
 M sidered worthy of all acceptation by those who are 
 " acquainted with the depth of their own natural 
 " degradation, and know their need of an omnipotent 
 " Redeemer"* — I cannot but feel my heart drawn 
 to him in Christian love. He who, in so devout 
 and earnest a frame of mind, holds and defends the 
 doctrines of the divinity and atonement of Jesus, 
 and the equal necessity of justification through his 
 
 * Ibid, pages 369, 370, 
 
 q2 
 
184 
 
 blood and righteousness and sanctification by the 
 gracious influence of his Spirit, — is one to whom, 
 though I may regard him as, in various points, mis- 
 taken, both as to his Master's mind and his Master's 
 will, — I must be allowed, in spite of all mistakes, to 
 offer the right hand of fellowship, as a partaker of 
 " like precious faith" with myself. 
 
 From the whole tenor of Mr Gurney's writings, I 
 am satisfied, that the doctrine of free justification, — 
 of justification on the ground of the Redeemer's right- 
 eousness alone, without works of law, — is a doctrine 
 which he holds with a firm faith, and which is dear 
 to him as the sole ground of hope towards God, for 
 himself and for a perishing world. He will, there- 
 fore, be jealous of every encroachment upon it ; — 
 and if he himself, in defending any peculiar article 
 of his theological system, has been led, inadvertently, 
 to adopt an explanation of any portion of Scripture, 
 which even seems to be at variance with it, and 
 which the passage itself neither requires nor admits, 
 he will be glad to receive the correction of his error. 
 This, I cannot but think, has been the case, in regard 
 to the passage in the second chapter of the epistle to 
 the Romans, adverted to in my last letter ; and of 
 which I promised to notice in this the bearing of Mr 
 Gurney's interpretation on the great doctrine of the 
 sinner's acceptance with God. — The passage referred 
 to is in verses 13 — 15, " For not the hearers of the 
 
185 
 
 law are just before God, but the doers of the law 
 shall be justified. For when the Gentiles which 
 have not the law do by nature the things contained 
 in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto 
 themselves : who show the work of the law written 
 in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, 
 and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else 
 excusing one another." — I enter at present into no 
 critical discussions as to the proper rendering of any 
 of the terms or phrases in the passage ; because, as 
 such discussions would not materially affect the pre- 
 cise point at issue, they would only distract the read- 
 er's mind. " Upon this clear and striking passage," 
 says Mr Gurney, " it may be observed, first, that the 
 " law here mentioned is not the ceremonial law, as 
 " the whole tenor of the apostle's argument plainly 
 " shows; but the moral law of God, which was re- 
 " vealed to the Jews, and was, with still greater com- 
 " pleteness, unfolded under the Christian dispensa- 
 " tion: secondly, that the Gentiles, here brought into 
 " a comparison with the Jews, were not these con- 
 " verts to Christianity, (for of these it could not, 
 " with any truth, be asserted that they had not the 
 " law;) but they were persons who had received no 
 '•'outward revelation of the moral law of God: 
 " thirdly, that the work of the law was nevertheless 
 " written in their hearts, and that many of them (ac- 
 " cording to the apostle's obvious supposition) were 
 Q3 
 
186 
 
 " thereby actually enabled to become doers of the 
 " law : and lastly, that these persons were justified, 
 " or accepted of the Father." * — With the first and 
 second of these observations I perfectly agree ; but 
 in the third and fourth I think Mr Gurney has gone 
 beyond the apostle, drawing from his words what they 
 were not intended to teach. In the third, for exam- 
 ple, he assumes it to be " the apostle's obvious sup- 
 position " that " many" of the Gentiles were " doers of 
 the law'' in the sense of the designation in verse 13, 
 where it is said "the doers of the law shall be justi- 
 fied ;" — and in the fourth, that these " doers of the 
 law" actually " ivere justified." — I have formerly 
 endeavoured to show the amount of meaning in the 
 phrases " doing the things contained in the law," 
 - — " showing the works of the law written in their 
 hearts," — and being " a law unto themselves." I 
 must refer for this to my last letter. — In what the 
 apostle says of the Gentiies, in verses 14, 15, his 
 object is to show, that, although they had not the 
 written law, the law of revelation, they had a law ; 
 — that this was manifest in their " doing the things 
 contained in the law;" in the testimony of their con- 
 sciences ; and in the reasonings by which they con- 
 demned or vindicated particular actions and courses 
 of conduct. But when, in the thirteenth verse, he 
 
 * Observations on the distinguishing views and practices of the 
 Society of Friends. Chap. i. pages 29, 30. Seventh edition. 
 
187 
 
 says, " Not the hearers of the law are just before 
 God, but the doers of the law shall be justified" he 
 seems to me, most evidently, to use language pre- 
 cisely equivalent to what the law itself says — " The 
 man who doeth these things shall live by them." 
 These are the terms in which, as he states elsewhere, 
 " Moses describeth the righteousness ivhich is by the 
 law" He lays down the universally admitted prin- 
 ciple of law, — that justification is by the doing of it. 
 And he shows that this principle has application to 
 Gentiles and Jews alike, both being under law. If, 
 therefore, he represents those heathens of whom he 
 speaks, as actually justified, he represents them as 
 justified by the doing of the law. — His object is, to 
 expose the folly of the Jews in trusting for their ac- 
 ceptance with God to the mere possession of the law 
 — to the hearing without the doing. This he does, 
 first, by thus stating the principle, common to the 
 divine law and all other laws, — essential even to the 
 abstract idea of law, — that the doing of its require- 
 ments is the sole ground on which a law can justify, 
 or acquit, the subjects of it. And afterwards, to- 
 wards the end of the chapter, he resumes the same 
 point, and argues it hypothetically, — that is, on the 
 supposition of certain cases existing. After a most 
 pointed and awakening appeal to his countrymen, 
 who, while they trusted and gloried in the law, 
 through breaking of the law dishonoured God, he 
 
188 
 
 reasons thus : " For circumcision verily profiteth, if 
 thou keep the law ; but if thou be a breaker of the 
 law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. There- 
 fore, if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of 
 the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for 
 circumcision ? And shall not uncircumcision, which 
 is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by 
 the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?" 
 Verses 25 — 27. The meaning of the apostle in the 
 first of these verses — verse 25- — appears to be this ; 
 - — You glory in being a Jew, — a descendant of Abra- 
 ham ; and, without doubt, your belonging to that 
 people is of eminent advantage to you, especially as 
 affording you the knowledge of God's will. But you 
 seem to forget the nature of that law in which you 
 so confidently trust, — the extent of its requirements, 
 - — the terms on which it promises life. Remember, 
 that it is not to circumcision, — not to mere natural 
 descent from Abraham, — not even to the knowledge 
 of God's will thence resulting, — that life is promised : 
 —it is to the doing of the law — " The man that do- 
 eth these things shall live by them." — If, then, you 
 keep — if you fulfil the law, your expectations of life 
 from it will not be disappointed. In that case, your 
 circumcision will profit you ; your Jewish extraction, 
 and consequent knowledge of the law, will be of real 
 and essential benefit. But if, on the contrary, you 
 be a transgressor of the law, you must be aware that 
 
189 
 
 to transgressors it gives no hope, — no promise of life. 
 To transgressors it is all threatening, condemnation;, 
 and curse. As a transgressor, therefore, your cir- 
 cumcision can profit you nothing : it is " made un- 
 circumcision ;" that is, you are not a whit the better 
 for your privileges, more than the Gentiles, the un- 
 circumcised Gentiles, who have never possessed them, 
 and over whom you inconsiderately glory. Your 
 being a Jew, — your boasted connexion with Abra- 
 ham, and the sign of the covenant in your flesh, are 
 of no service to you." — Then, in the two following 
 verses — 26 and 27 — he urges this point upon their 
 attention, in order the more effectually to convince 
 them of the untenableness of their ground, — by sup- 
 posing the case of an uncircumcised Gentile actually 
 fulfilling the law. The argument in these verses 
 may, I should think, be thus amplified : — " You trust 
 in the letter of the law, and in circumcision. But, 
 since it is not to the possession of these (as has just 
 been observed,) that life is promised, but to the prac- 
 tical fulBlment of the law in all its precepts ; let me 
 suppose a heathen, who has neither the letter of the 
 law nor circumcision on which to place any reliance, 
 — let me suppose such a heathen to ' keep the right- 
 eousness of the law,' — that is, although not possess- 
 ing it in a written form, yet living fully up to its holy 
 requirements : do you really imagine that such a one 
 would perish, merely because he is not a Jew? What 
 
190 
 
 is the difference between you, as a transgressor of the 
 law, and a wicked Gentile? Does not it consist 
 simply in your having * the letter and circumcision,' 
 of which he is destitute ? If, then, you were to be 
 accepted, notwithstanding that your character is as 
 profligate as his, solely on account of your being in 
 possession of these, would it not necessarily follow, 
 that a Gentile, even although he should * keep the 
 righteousness of the law,' must perish because he is 
 without them? — that is, must perish for a thing which 
 he cannot help, — and perish, in direct contravention 
 of the very principle of the law, and the express let- 
 ter of the divine assurance — * The man that doeth 
 these things shall live by them ? ' Is it not, on the 
 contrary, equally obvious and equitable, that, were 
 such a heathen to be found, so far from being rejected 
 on account of his uncircumcision, he should 'judge 
 thee — possessing over thee the very superiority to 
 which thou pretendest over him, — pronouncing the 
 heavy aggravation of thy guilt, who, in flagrant vio- 
 lation of the letter of the law, and of the privileges 
 connected with thy circumcision, * dost transgress the 
 law ?' — living in the wilful and remorseless breach of 
 its pure and righteous precepts, misled by a strange 
 insensate confidence in the mere possession of the 
 book which contains them ! " 
 
 In support of the hypothetical character of the 
 apostle's reasoning here, it may be observed, in the 
 
191 
 
 first place, that he has not yet entered on his forma! 
 statement of the only ground of a sinner's acceptance 
 with God, — whether Jew or Gentile ; but has here 
 in view, as his leading, or rather his exclusive object, 
 to convince the Jews, his unbelieving countrymen, of 
 the fallacious presumption of their hope ; and as, in 
 many cases, it is quite legitimate and conclusive to 
 argue on supposition, so nothing can be more to his 
 purpose, more fitted to expose the vanity of Jewish 
 confidence, than the supposition actually made — And, 
 secondly, the terms employed contribute further to 
 show, that the case from which he argues is a hypo- 
 thetical one. It is that of a Gentile, who is in a state 
 of nature, "fulfilling" the law, — that is, rendering a 
 complete obedience to its requirements : — for, although 
 I would by no means affirm that the original word is 
 always used in this strict and literal acceptation, yet 
 it is, without question, its most proper and legitimate 
 sense ; and, when so understood, it cannot, it is evi- 
 dent, be considered as descriptive of any real char- 
 acter, whether Gentile or Jew. 
 
 I am well aware, that Mr Gurney is as far as pos- 
 sible from holding the sentiment, that the Gentiles 
 spoken of are justified by their " doing the things 
 contained in the law," as if such doing were the 
 meritorious cause of their acceptance. He disowns 
 every such imputation : — " As the Gentiles," says he. 
 " to whom the apostle was here alluding, were, ac- 
 
192 
 
 a cording to their measure of light, sanctified through 
 " the Spirit, and when sanctified, accepted, so, I 
 " think, every Christian must allow, that they were 
 " accepted, not because of their own righteousness, 
 " but through the merits and mediation of the Son of 
 " God." — If, therefore, all that he means be this, — 
 that God conveys his lessons to mankind in two vo- 
 lumes, the volume of nature, and the volume of reve- 
 lation ; that the Holy Spirit may operate on the minds 
 and hearts of men by the lessons of the former as 
 well as by those of the latter ; and that if a man, 
 who is destitute of the volume of revelation, learns 
 aright what is taught in the volume he has, and is 
 rightly and habitually, though it may be far from per- 
 fectly, influenced by what he learns, such a man may 
 be found among the saved, — owing his salvation to 
 the merits of the Redeemer's mediation as its ground, 
 and to the Spirit's agency as its efficient cause ; any 
 one who has read the note appended to the preceding 
 letter will perceive, that on this point the difference 
 between us, in the theoretical principle of the case, 
 is not very wide. But to me, I repeat, it is evident, 
 that, when the apostle says " the doers of the law 
 shall be justified," he lays down, as he does in other 
 places, the general principle of the law, in terms of 
 the same import as those of the law itself; and that 
 to represent him as affirming, in such a connexion, 
 the justification of those Gentiles, (many according 
 
193 
 
 to Mr Gurney in number.) who u did the things con- 
 tained in the law," is exceedingly unlike his wonted 
 jealousy of the doctrine of justification by grace 
 " without the deeds of the law." — And moreover, 
 such an interpretation, while it requires straining to 
 bring it into harmony with this fundamental doc- 
 trine, does not seem to be consistent with the grand 
 scope of the whole passage. From the middle of the 
 first to the middle of the third chapter of the epistle, 
 the leading object of the apostle is, to prove the uni- 
 versal need of the salvation revealed in the gospel ; 
 the need of it among Jews and Gentiles alike. He 
 first brings in the Gentiles guilty, then the Jews : 
 the Gentiles, as transgressors of the law of tradition 
 and of conscience, — the Jews as transgressors of the 
 written law, given them by divine revelation. It is 
 thus he comes to his conclusion, chap. iii. 19. " Now 
 we know, that what things soever the law saith, it 
 saith to them who are under the law, that every 
 mouth" (the mouth of the Jew as well as that of the 
 Gentile) " might be stopped, and all the world be- 
 come guilty before God." Having arrived at this 
 conclusion, — the universal guilt of mankind, — he 
 proceeds to found upon it the necessity of the grand 
 gospel doctrine of justification by grace, through 
 faith in the mediatorial righteousness of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, and to give a clear and explicit state- 
 ment of this doctrine, as well as of the comprehen- 
 
 R 
 
194 
 
 siveness of God's gracious purpose in the gospel 
 scheme, as including Gentiles and Jews alike. Verses 
 20 — 29. — Now, that in an argument of which the 
 leading object is to establish the universal sinful- 
 ness and guilt of men, with the ulterior view of 
 basing upon that conclusion the doctrine of justi- 
 fication by grace, — that in the course of such an 
 argument he should introduce a representation of 
 many among the Gentiles being brought, without 
 the gospel, to a state of justification and sanctifica- 
 tion, brought to sustain the character of " doers 
 of the law" and persons accepted with God; — 
 that he should bring before us Gentiles actually 
 justified, before he has even closed that proof of 
 universal guilt on which the doctrine of justification 
 is founded ; — does not appear to my mind at all 
 natural, or consistent with that lucid order and con- 
 tinuity of reasoning, by which the argumentative 
 parts of this apostle's writings are distinguished. — 
 The whole of the second chapter, and the beginning 
 of the third, appear to be by far most naturally in- 
 terpreted, as a setting forth of principles, for the con- 
 viction of the Jews ; — to shake their false confidences 
 in external privilege ; — to show them the common 
 ground on which they stood with the Gentiles, as 
 fellow-sinners, only with the balance of comparative 
 guilt against themselves, in proportion to their supe- 
 rior light and various advantages ; — to prepare them 
 
195 
 
 for the question and its answer in ch. iii. 9. " What 
 then? are we better than they?" (we Jews than they 
 Gentiles ?) " No, in no wise : for we have before 
 proved both, Jews and Gentiles, that they are all 
 wider sin. 1 * 
 
 But I must pass from this to an inquiry of a differ- 
 ent and more general kind. I have given, in copious 
 extracts, the views of Joseph John Gurney on the 
 doctrine of justification. They are clear, simple, 
 scriptural. But — are they Quakerism? Let none 
 be startled by the question. It is not a hasty incon- 
 siderate one. I shall show you that there is room 
 for it. There are large portions of the writings of 
 this highly intelligent and devout Friend, in which 
 we entirely lose sight of the peculiarities of Quaker 
 sentiment and Quaker phraseology. He seems to 
 lay aside his garb, or rather to divest the system of 
 the costume in which before it had invariably ap- 
 peared. But for the occurrence, here and there, of 
 a word or phrase, which, to those familiar with the 
 language of the body, conveys more than others 
 might at all think of, we go through entire sections 
 with unmingled pleasure, losing the Friend in the 
 Christian, — almost forgetting even the inward light. 
 I presume I speak according to truth, when I repre- 
 sent them as the first Quaker writings, at least of any 
 eminence, possessing this character. He stands per 
 se ; and (if I am not greatly mistaken) with no in- 
 R 2 
 
196 
 
 considerable proportion of the more rigid Friends, 
 who belong to the old school, and hold by the ancient 
 fathers of Quakerism, he has, on this very account, 
 been losing caste. I trust Mr Gurney, as an inquirer 
 after truth, and an advocate of what he believes to 
 be from God, has learned to estimate every thing of 
 this kind at its proper value; and that, " counting all 
 things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge 
 of Jesus Christ, ,, he will allow no consideration what- 
 ever to tempt him one step aside from the straight- 
 forward path which the pursuit of truth prescribes. 
 And allow me again, with every feeling of respect, to 
 remind you all, that the question must not be, What 
 is Quakerism ? but what is Scripturism ? — not what 
 is Foxism, or Pennism, or Barclayism, or Gurney- 
 ism ? — but what is Paulism ? — Now, on the great 
 doctrine of justification, am I not right in my appre- 
 hension, that there has existed amongst Friends a 
 very considerable measure of diversity of sentiment, 
 and no small portion of undefined vagueness of con- 
 ception ? I fear there has ; and I think it is imput- 
 able to the incessant intrusion into this ground of the 
 all-pervading article of your system — the inward 
 light. This has infused into all the Quaker statements 
 of this doctrine, previous to those of Joseph John 
 Gurney, a characteristic mysticism. It has, on this 
 and some other subjects, been a darkening light. At 
 times, we have something approaching to clearness 
 
197 
 
 on the doctrine of the sinner's acceptance with God ; 
 — but, ere we are aware, the "inward light" throws 
 its shadow over it, and wraps it in obscurity. It is 
 the use made of the inward light in the sinner's jus- 
 tification that has led to the otherwise unaccountable 
 confounding of it with sanctification ; to the revers- 
 ing of the scripture order, by giving the latter the 
 precedence of the former, by representing works as 
 in some way available to it, or by putting something 
 or other (it is often difficult to say what) under the 
 name of inward light, in place of the simple belief 
 of the testimony of God in the Gospel, as necessary 
 to its attainment. 
 
 Those of you who are acquainted with your own 
 authors will, I am persuaded, assent to the general 
 correctness of this representation. In the statements 
 of Mr Gurney, the ground of the sinner's acceptance 
 with God is cleared of all such mysticism and con- 
 fusion. I have ventured to ask, whether these state- 
 ments are Quakerism. That many Friends agree 
 with them, I rejoice to know. But if they are Qua- 
 kerism, I apprehend they must be distinguished by 
 the designation of modem Quakerism; and with me, 
 I need not assure you, the designation would be no 
 disparagement. But, that I may not appear to speak 
 ivithout book, — or to make general assertions without 
 specific proof, let me now, for a little, set the views 
 of Joseph John Gurney in comparison with those of 
 r 3 
 
198 
 
 Robert Barclay, and see how far they agree, and how 
 far they differ. The anonymous author of " Stric- 
 tures" on Mr Newton's " Remonstrance to the So- 
 ciety of Friends," complains bitterly of that gentle- 
 man's partial quotations from Barclay. It is fre- 
 quently not easy to determine the extent of quotation 
 necessary to do an author justice, in presenting a fair 
 and full idea, of his sentiments. It does not appear 
 to me, that the author of the " Strictures" has made 
 matters much better in behalf of Barclay, by the fill- 
 ing up of what Mr Newton had omitted. But I 
 shall endeavour to avoid exposing myself to any simi- 
 lar charge, in the citation of such passages from the 
 Apology as contain the views of its author on the 
 essential article of gospel truth now under our no- 
 tice, — the article of Justification. To this article 
 his seventh proposition is devoted ; the illustration 
 occupying forty -five octavo pages. I shall not be 
 expected, I presume, to quote the whole ! 
 
 I give, first of all, the proposition itself entire : — 
 " As many as resist not this light, but receive the 
 " same, it becomes in them a holy, pure, and spiritual 
 " birth, bringing forth holiness, righteousness, purity, 
 " and all those other blessed fruits which are accept- 
 " able to God : by which holy birth, to wit, Jesus 
 " Christ formed within us, and working his works in 
 " us, as we are sanctified, so are we justified in the 
 " sight of God, according to the apostle's words, — 
 
199 
 
 " c But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye 
 " are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and 
 " by the Spirit of our God/ 1 Cor. vi. 11. There- 
 " fore, it is not by our works wrought in our will, 
 " nor yet by good works, considered as of themselves, 
 11 but by Christ who is both the gift and the giver, 
 " and the cause producing the effects in us ; who, as 
 " he hath reconciled us when we were enemies, doth 
 " also in his wisdom save us and justify us after this 
 " manner, as saith the same apostle elsewhere, ' Ac- 
 " cording to his mercy he saved us, by the washing 
 " of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy 
 « Ghost,' Tit. iii. 5." * 
 
 After speaking of the " papists, as placing their 
 " justification, not so much in any work of holiness 
 " really brought forth in them, and real forsaking of 
 " iniquity, as in the mere performance of some cere- 
 " monies, and a blind belief which their teachers have 
 " begotten in them, that the church and the Pope, 
 i 6 having the absolute dispensation of the merits of 
 " Christ, have power to make those merits effectual 
 y for the remission of sins, and justification of such 
 4 ' as will perform those ceremonies — " &c. he adds : 
 — " This doctrine Luther and the protestants then 
 u had good reason to deny and oppose; though many 
 " of them ran into another extreme, so as to deny 
 
 * Apology, page 196. 
 
200 
 
 "good works to be necessary to justification, and to 
 " preach up, not only remission of sins, but justifica- 
 " tion by faith alone, without all works, however 
 " good. So that men do not obtain their justifica- 
 " tion according as they are inwardly sanctified and 
 " renewed, but are justified merely by believing that 
 " Christ died for them ; and so some may be per- 
 " fectly justified, though they be lying in gross 
 " wickedness ; as appears by the example of David, 
 " who, they say, was fully and perfectly justified. 
 " while he was lying in the gross sins of adultery and 
 " murder," &c* 
 
 " Forasmuch as all men who have come to man's 
 " estate (the man Jesus only excepted) have sinned. 
 " therefore all have need of this Saviour, to remove 
 " the wrath of God from them due to their offences : 
 " in this respect, he is truly said to have ' borne the 
 " iniquities of us all in his own body on the tree,' 
 " and therefore is the only Mediator, having quali- 
 " fied the wrath of God toward us ; so that our for- 
 " mer sins stand not in our way, being, by virtue of 
 " his most satisfactory sacrifice, removed and par- 
 " doned. Neither do we think that remission of sins 
 " is to be expected, sought, or obtained, any other 
 "way, or by any works or sacrifice whatsoever; 
 " though, as has been said formerly, they may come 
 
 * Ibid, page 200. 
 
201 
 
 u to partake of this remission that are ignorant of the 
 u history. So then, Christ, by his death and suffer- 
 " ings, hath reconciled us to God, even while we are 
 " enemies ; that is, he offers reconciliation unto us ; 
 " we are put into a capacity of being reconciled ; 
 " God is willing to forgive us our iniquities, and to 
 " accept us, as is well expressed by the apostle, 2 
 " Cor. v. 19. < God was in Christ, reconciling the 
 " world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses 
 " unto them, and hath put in us the word of recon- 
 " ciliation.' And therefore the apostle, in the next 
 " verses, entreats them, in Christ's stead, to be re- 
 " conciled unto God ; intimating that, the wrath of 
 " God being removed by the obedience of Christ 
 " Jesus, he is willing to be reconciled unto them. 
 " and ready to remit the sins that are past, if they 
 " repent."* 
 
 " We understand not, by this justification by 
 ' ; Christ, barely the good works even wrought by 
 " the Spirit of Christ ; for they, as protestants truly 
 " affirm, are rather an effect of justification than the 
 " cause of it : but we understand the formation of 
 " Christ in us, born and brought forth in us, from 
 " which good works as naturally proceed as fruit from 
 " a fruitful tree. It is this inward birth in us, bring- 
 u ing forth righteousness and holiness in us, that doth 
 
 * Ibid, page 208, 
 
202 
 
 " justify us; which having removed and done away 
 " the contrary nature and spirit, that did bear rule 
 C{ and bring condemnation, now is in dominion over 
 " all in our hearts. Those, therefore, that come to 
 " know Christ thus formed in them, do enjoy him 
 " wholly and undivided, who is the Lord our 
 " righteousness. Jer. xxiii. 6."* 
 
 " Though we place remission of sins in the right- 
 " eousness and obedience of Christ performed by him 
 " in the flesh, as to what pertains to the remote pro- 
 " curing cause, and that we hold ourselves formally 
 "justified by Christ Jesus formed and brought forth 
 " in us ; yet can we not, as some protestants have 
 " unwarily done, exclude works from justification. 
 " For though properly we be not justified for them, 
 " yet are we justified in them ; and they are neces- 
 " sary as causa sine qua non 9 that is, the cause with- 
 " out which none are justified." f 
 
 " It is by this inward birth of Christ in man that 
 " man is made just, and therefore so accounted by 
 " God : — wherefore, to be plain, we are thereby, and 
 " not till that be brought forth in us, formally, if we 
 " must use that word, justified in the sight of God ; 
 " because justification is both more properly and 
 " more frequently, in Scripture, taken in its proper 
 " signification, for making one just, and not reputing 
 
 * Ibid, page 205. f Ibid, page 20b'. 
 
203 
 
 iv one merely as such, and is all on? with sanctifica- 
 " tion."* 
 
 " Since good works as naturally follow from this 
 " birth, as heat from fire, therefore are they of abso- 
 " lute necessity to justification, as causa sine qua 
 " non ; i. e. though not as the cause for which, yet 
 " as the cause in which we are, and without which 
 " we cannot be, justified. And, though they be not 
 " meritorious, and draw no debt upon God, yet he 
 " cannot but accept and reward them : for it is con- 
 " trary to his nature to deny his own, since they may 
 " be perfect in their kind, as proceeding from a pure 
 " holy birth and root. Wherefore, their judgment 
 " is false and against the truth, who say that the ho- 
 " liest works of the saints are defiled and sinful in 
 t; the sight of God : for these good works are not 
 " the works of the law, excluded by the apostle from 
 " justification."! 
 
 " That we deserved those things, and much more, 
 " for our sins, which he endured in obedience to the 
 " Father, and according to his counsel, is true; but 
 u that ever God reputed him a sinner, is denied: 
 " neither did he ever die that we should be reputed 
 " righteous, though no more really such than He was 
 " a sinner, as hereafter appears. For indeed, if this 
 " argument hold, it might be stretched to that length 
 
 * Ibid, page 208. f Ibid » P 3 ^ 208< 
 
204 
 
 " as to be very pteasing to wicked men that love to 
 " abide in their sins : for if we be made righteous, 
 " as Christ was made a sinner, merely by imputation, 
 " then, as there was no sin, no not in the least, in 
 " Christ, so it would follow, that there needed no 
 u more righteousness, no more holiness, no more in- 
 " ward sanctification in us, than there was sin in him, 
 " So then, by his ( being made sin for us' must be 
 * c understood his suffering for our sins, that we might 
 " be made partakers of the grace purchased by him ; 
 <c by the workings whereof we are ' made the right- 
 " eousness of God in him.' For that the apostle 
 u understood here a being made really righteous, and 
 " not merely a being reputed such, appears by what 
 " follows, seeing in verses 14, 15, 16. of the following 
 " chapter, he argues largely against any supposed 
 " agreement of light and darkness, righteousness and 
 " unrighteousness, which must needs be admitted, if 
 " men are to be reckoned ingrafted into Christ, and 
 " real members of him, merely by an imputative 
 " righteousness, wholly without them, while they 
 " themselves are actually unrighteous. And indeed 
 " it may be thought strange, how some men have 
 " made this so fundamental an article of their faith, 
 " which is so contrary to the whole strain of the Gos- 
 " pel ; a thing which Christ, in none of all his ser- 
 " mons and gracious speeches, ever willed any to rely 
 " upon ; always recommending to us works, as instru- 
 
205 
 
 " mental to our justification. And the more it is to 
 " be admired, because that sentence or term (so fre- 
 " quently in their mouths, and so often pressed by 
 " them as the very basis of their hope and confidence) 
 " to wit, the imputed righteousness of Christ, is not 
 " to be found in all the Bible, at least as to my ob- 
 " servation/'* 
 
 M That it is by this revelation of Jesus Christ, and 
 " the new creation in us, that we are justified, doth 
 " evidently appear from that excellent saying of the 
 " apostle included in the proposition itself, Tit. iii. 5. 
 " * According to his mercy he hath saved us, by the 
 " washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
 " Ghost, &c.' Now, that whereby we are saved, 
 " that we are no doubt justified by ; which words 
 " are in this respect synonymous. Here the apostle 
 " ascribes the immediate cause of justification to this 
 " inward work of regeneration, which is Jesus Christ 
 " revealed in the soul, as being that which formally 
 " states us in a capacity of being reconciled to God; 
 t; the washing or regeneration being that inward 
 u power and virtue, whereby the soul is cleansed, and 
 " clothed with the righteousness of Christ, so as to 
 <; be made fit to appear before God."f 
 
 " If no man can be justified without faith, and no 
 " faith be living, nor yet available to justification 
 
 a Ibid, pages 214, 215. f Ibid, page 225. 
 
206 
 
 %i without works, then works are necessary to justifi- 
 " cation."* 
 
 " There is a great difference betwixt the works of 
 " the law, and those of grace, or of the gospel. The 
 " first are excluded ; the second not, but are necessary. 
 " The first are those which are performed in man's 
 " own will, and by his strength, in a conformity to the 
 " outward law and letter ; and therefore are man's 
 " own imperfect works, or works of the law, which 
 " ' makes nothing perfect ;' and to this belong all the 
 " ceremonies, purifications, washings, and traditions 
 " of the Jews. The second are the works of the 
 " Spirit of grace in the heart, wrought in conformity 
 " to the inward and spiritual law ; which works are 
 " not wrought in man's will, nor by his power and 
 " ability, but in and by the power and Spirit of 
 " Christ in us, and therefore are pure and perfect in 
 " their kind, and may be called Christ's works, for 
 " that he is the immediate author and worker of 
 " them. Such works we affirm absolutely neces- 
 " sary to justification, so that a man cannot be justi- 
 " fied without them ; and all faith without them is 
 " dead and useless, as the apostle James saith/'f 
 
 I have made these extracts copiously, and, if I do 
 not greatly deceive myself, impartially, — that is, so 
 as to exhibit fairly, and as clearly as their own in- 
 
 * Ibid, page 229. f Ibid * P a S e 231 - 
 
207 
 
 herent and palpable inconsistencies will admit, the 
 views of the author. The subject is a vital one ; 
 resembling, in the Christian system, those parts in 
 the corporeal frame, in which a wound, or any mate- 
 rial disorganization, is invariably fatal. And the first 
 thing I have to request of you is, that you would 
 compare the doctrine taught in these extracts with 
 that contained in the extracts from J. J. Gurney ; 
 and, having done so, to ask yourselves the question, 
 whether both can possibly have been the dictate of 
 the same Spirit. It is impossible you can read the 
 two, however hastily, without being struck with the 
 difference, not in mere phraseology, but in the 
 essence of the sentiment. Now, if there be any 
 class of men amongst you, whom we should expect, 
 more than others, to be under the guidance of that 
 immediate inspiration for which you contend as the 
 privilege of New Testament believers, it is surely 
 your eminent and generally accredited writers. But 
 then, the Holy Spirit cannot contradict himself; and 
 if Robert Barclay and Joseph John Gurney contra- 
 dict each other, — both may be wrong, but it is clear 
 that both cannot be right ; and that by the one, or 
 by the other, the Spirit of the Lord has not spoken. 
 The question, it is true, is of comparatively little 
 consequence, whether they do or do not agree with 
 each other ; the grand point to be ascertained being, 
 which of them, or whether either of them, agrees 
 s2 
 
208 
 
 with the apostles of Christ. I conceive the state- 
 ment of the doctrine of justification given by Mr 
 Gurney to be substantially that of Scripture, — clear, 
 simple, satisfactory. That given by Barclay appears 
 to me distinguished by a most extraordinary confu- 
 sion of ideas, and, as far as its principles can be at 
 all distinctly ascertained, subversive, materially if not 
 utterly, of the apostolic gospel. This is a heavy 
 charge ; but I do not make it lightly. — I shall leave 
 you, however, in the meanwhile, to compare the 
 views of Barclay, for yourselves, with the unerring 
 oracles of divine truth ; that you may bring your 
 minds to the perusal of my next letter with a seri- 
 ousness proportioned to the deeply interesting nature 
 of the subject. — I cannot but feel confident, that, if 
 you examine these oracles aright, I shall be able to 
 carry you along with me in my vindication of the 
 heavy judgment which I have ventured to pronounce 
 on Barclay's representations of it. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 R. W. 
 
LETTER VI. 
 
 ON BARCLAY'S VIEWS OF JUSTIFICATION. 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 Having laid before you in my last 
 letter, copious citations from the " Apology/ 5 on 
 the all-important subject of the Bible doctrine ot 
 justification, I concluded it with a charge, which I 
 admitted to be a heavy one, but which I could not 
 then consent to modify ; — namely, that, while the 
 statement given by Barclay is " distinguished by a 
 " most extraordinary confusion of ideas," it appears 
 to me also, "so far as its principles can be distinctly 
 " ascertained, to be subversive, materially if not ut- 
 " terly, of the apostolic gospel." — This heavy charge 
 I cannot now, any more than formerly, consent to 
 modify. — Leaving, then, for subsequent notice the 
 source of the confusion and the error, which it is not 
 difficult to detect in the leading principles of ancient 
 Quakerism, observe, in the meanwhile : — 
 
 1, In Barclay's statement, explicitly and by per- 
 vading implication, justification and sanctificaiion are, 
 s 3 
 
210 
 
 strangely identified. The distinction between the 
 two is, in the Scriptures, as clearly defined, as if it 
 had been traced with a pencil of light ; and it is 
 well maintained in the statements of Mr Gurney. 
 The distinction, indeed, is so plain, that one should 
 have thought the weakest mind could not miss per- 
 ceiving it ; which renders the perverting influence 
 of an erroneous principle, in the case of a mind such 
 as Barclay's, the more remarkable. Justification re- 
 lates to state ; sanctification to character. In justi- 
 fication, the sinner is pardoned and accepted ; that 
 is, he is absolved from guilt and condemnation, and, 
 though a sinner, is graciously treated as righteous ; on 
 what ground, w r e shall see immediately: — in sanctifi- 
 cation, those principles of personal holiness are in- 
 fused into his heart, which extend their purifying 
 influence to his life. The difference between the 
 two may be simply illustrated by the case of a pris- 
 oner at a human tribunal. He may be proved guilty, 
 but pardoned : — the pardon of his crimes may be 
 officially and solemnly announced to him ; and he 
 may be dismissed from the bar, free of charge in the 
 eye of law. But though his state is thus changed, 
 his character may remain the same : he may carry 
 with him from the bar, an unaltered and unmitigated 
 disposition to evil, — a heart as wicked as ever. He 
 is pardoned, and, in the eye of law, reputed and 
 treated as innocent ; but he is unpurified from his 
 
211 
 
 pollution. I am aware that what may, and frequently 
 does, take place, under human governments, has no 
 parallel in the government of God ; that under his 
 administration, there is no pardon without purity, 
 no change of state without a change of character, no 
 justification without sanctification ; that the two are 
 invariably found together ; no sinner, since the fall, 
 having ever been justified without being sanctified, 
 or sanctified without being justified. But this does 
 not warrant their being confounded ; any more than 
 we should be warranted to call justice mercy, and 
 mercy justice, as they subsist in the divine nature, 
 because the two are never found there in separation 
 from each other. Nor can they be confounded, with- 
 out the most pernicious results to the simplicity and 
 consistency of gospel truth. That Barclay does con- 
 found them, no attentive reader of the preceding 
 extracts can hesitate for a moment to admit. He 
 takes justification, according to its literal etymologi- 
 cal import (justum facere,) to signify making right- 
 eous ; and represents sinners as " made the right- 
 eousness of God in Christ," not when they are par- 
 doned and accepted on account of his perfect right- 
 eousness, but when the principles of personal right- 
 eousness are produced in them " by the workings of 
 his grace:" — and indeed, w T hat can be more explicit 
 than the assertion, (an assertion which cannot but 
 surprise Mr Gurney and many more amongst you, 
 
212 
 
 as much as it does myself) — that "justification is 
 " both more properly and more frequently, in Serip- 
 " ture, taken in its proper signification, for making 
 " one just, and not reputing one merely as such, and 
 " is all one with sanctijication /" 
 
 2. This leads me to notice, the denial by Barclay 
 of the doctrine of justification by imputed righteous- 
 ness. — Nothing can be more weak, than discarding a 
 doctrine, merely because the special phrase by which 
 theologians may, for brevity's sake, have chosen to 
 express it, does not occur in the Scriptures. Even 
 were the phrase ever so objectionable, the doctrine 
 may " stand sure," when human terms are rejected. 
 You will perceive that Mr Gurney adopts the phra- 
 seology which Barclay disowns ; and shows, in the 
 clearest manner, that the truth expressed by it is one 
 of the essential elementary principles of the Gospel. 
 I have no objection to take my stand, for this doc- 
 trine, on one text alone ; although I conceive the 
 principle to pervade the New Testament. The text 
 to which I refer is 2 Cor. v. 21. u For he hath made 
 him who knew no sin to be sin for us; that we might 
 be made the righteousness of God in him/' — There 
 is in the words a double antithesis : — Jesus ts knew 
 no sin," but he was " made sin :" — and he was 
 " made sin," that we might be " made righteous- 
 ness." On account of this second antithesis, which 
 was evidently and pointedly intended by the apostle, 
 
213 
 
 I prefer our own translation to that of those who 
 would render the words " he hath made him a sin- 
 offering ;" besides that it is not desirable, when it 
 can be avoided, to understand the same word in dif- 
 ferent senses in the same clause of a short sentence. 
 There is no more impropriety in speaking of Christ's 
 being " made sin," than in speaking of our being 
 " made righteousness;" and, the antithesis being evi- 
 dent and pointed, it follows, that we are " made right- 
 eousness" in a sense corresponding to that in which 
 Christ was " made sin." How, then, was Christ 
 " made sin ?" I grant Mr Barclay, as readily and 
 as strongly as he could have wished, the absurdity of 
 the supposition that Christ was made a sinner \ — as if 
 there could be any thing in the case of the nature of 
 actual transference of our sinfulness to his personal 
 character; — a conception nowhere to be found but 
 in the ravings of antinomian insanity. How, then, 
 setting aside this folly, does Mr Barclay himself in- 
 terpret the phrase ? By his " being made sin for 
 us," says he, " must be understood his suffering for 
 u our sins." Well : this surely implies that our sins 
 were imputed to him, or laid to his charge ; for how 
 otherwise could he bear the suffering due to them ? 
 I know of no possible way in which he could be 
 " made sin," — or, in other words, in which our sins 
 could become his, — but by imputation. And if so ; 
 then, to make the antithesis fair, we must be " made 
 
214 
 
 righteousness," — or in other words, his righteousness 
 must become ours, — by imputation. Mr Barclay 
 loses the antithesis altogether, when, after having 
 interpreted Christ's being " made sin for us" of his 
 " suffering for our sins," he explains our being " made 
 the righteousness of God in him/' of our " bein^ 
 " made partakers of the grace purchased by him, by 
 " the workings whereof we are made the righteous- 
 " ness of God in him ;" thus resolving our being 
 "made righteousness" into our being sanctified, or 
 made personally righteous. The true force of the 
 antithesis evidently is, that, in being " made sin for 
 us," Christ endured the penalty due to our sins as if 
 they had been his ; and that, in being " made the 
 righteousness of God in him," we receive the reward 
 due to his righteousness, as if it had been ours. 
 There is, on neither side, actual transference ; on 
 both, there is imputation. I cannot put the all-im- 
 portant truth in more appropriate terms than those 
 in which it is clothed by Mr Gurney, at page 1 79. 
 I refer you to that admirable statement, begging you 
 earnestly to compare it with Barclay's, and both with 
 Paul's; and to judge for yourselves, which of the 
 two is in concord, and which at variance, with the 
 dictates of the Spirit of Christ. Both right, I re- 
 peat, they cannot be ; the one affirming the imputa- 
 tion of Christ's righteousness to be the very ground 
 of the believing sinner's acceptance with God, — the 
 
215 
 
 other denying the imputation of Christ's righteous- 
 ness altogether, as either the language or the senti- 
 ment of Scripture ; the one resting on it as his only 
 confidence, the other expressing his astonishment at 
 all who place their hopes on such a basis, — and re- 
 presenting it as "contrary to the whole strain of the 
 " Gospel, — a thing which Christ in none of all his 
 " sermons and gracious speeches ever willed any to 
 " rely upon, always recommending to us works as 
 " instrumental to our justification. " — Which of these 
 is Quakerism? "Whether of them twain" was 
 " taught of God ?" " Which way went the Spirit of 
 Christ from" Paul, to dictate such things to Barclay? 
 —But 
 
 3. Mark w^hat Barclay says of works : — Jesus 
 Christ according to him " always recommended 
 works as instrumental to justification" If he did, 
 then so of course did his apostles after him ; for it was 
 his promised Spirit that " led them into all truth." We 
 are to understand Mr Barclay, therefore, as affirming 
 it to be the doctrine of Christ and his apostles, — 
 the doctrine taught by the Spirit of truth in the 
 Scriptures, that good works are " necessary to jus- 
 tification" — " instrumental to justification" — " neces- 
 sary as a causa sine qua non, that is, the cause with- 
 out which none are justified." — Language more at 
 variance than this with the representations of Scrip- 
 ture, it is not easy to conceive. And when I say 
 
216 
 
 so, I have fully in remembrance the distinction 
 made by Barclay between the works of the law and 
 the works of the Gospel ; the former of which he 
 excludes from having an}' influence in justification, 
 while he affirms the necessity of the latter. The 
 inconsistency of this representation with itself will 
 be noticed immediately: — my present object is, to 
 point out its contrariety to the spirit and letter of 
 the Gospel. The divine testimony is, that " all have 
 sinned;" — that, all having sinned, all are condemned 
 by the sentence of that law of which sin is the trans- 
 gression, and of which the terms are so unequivocally 
 explicit — " Cursed is every one that continueth not 
 in all things that are written in the book of the law, 
 to do them ;" so that, unless the man can be found 
 who has " continued in all things written in the book 
 of the law, and done them" — done them in principle 
 and in practice, in all their extent and spirituality of 
 requirement, — the man cannot be found who is not 
 under this curse ; — that from this state of condemna- 
 tion and curse, there is no deliverance possible by 
 any "works of righteousness" which the sinner can 
 do, — the righteousness of a sinner being a contradic- 
 tion in terms, and every attempt of a sinner to justify 
 himself an attempt at an impossibility, and an insult 
 to the God with whom he has to do ; — that a sinner 
 must be a debtor to mercy; — that the only ground on 
 which mercy is dispensed to sinners is, the righteous- 
 
217 
 
 ness, atonement, and intercession of the Son of God, 
 the Divine Mediator between God and men ; — and 
 that in the meritorious and saving virtue of his fin- 
 ished work sinners obtain an interest by faith, — that 
 is, by believing the record that God hath given of 
 his Son, — u the word of reconciliation, — that God 
 was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not 
 imputing their trespasses unto them," — that " grace 
 reigns through righteousness unto eternal life, by 
 Jesus Christ our Lord," — that " the wages of sin is 
 death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord." — Justification by grace is 
 the first principle of the Gospel. Deny it, and the 
 Gospel is gone. The Gospel is " glad tidings." But 
 to sinners, there can be no glad tidings but tidings of 
 grace. Grace is their essential element. Take it 
 aw r ay, and there is nothing left that deserves the 
 name. Now, in the philosophy of the Bible, and in 
 the philosophy of common sense, grace and works 
 are opposites; and no terms can be more explicit than 
 those in which the apostle of the Gentiles teaches us, 
 that salvation must be entirely of the one, or entirely 
 of the other, — that there is no medium, and no possi- 
 ble combination or compromise : — " If it be by grace, 
 then is it no more of works ; otherwise grace is no more 
 grace: — but if it be by w r orks, then is it no more of 
 grace; otherwise work is no more work." Rom. xi. 
 6. Thus grace and works reciprocally neutralize 
 
 T 
 
218 
 
 and destroy each other. Introduce grace, and works 
 are gone: introduce works, and grace is gone. — And 
 if justification is by grace, and at the same time 
 through faith, then must the opposition between faith 
 and works be as perfect as the opposition between 
 grace and works. Without this, the scheme would 
 be inconsistent with itself. And such accordingly is 
 the inspired statement. Justification by faith and 
 justification by works, are as perfect contraries as 
 justification by grace and justification by works ; 
 faith itself forming no part of the ground of accept- 
 ance, but being only the medium of the sinner's in- 
 terest in that ground ; and this, on the simple prin- 
 ciple, that, as the Gospel comes to sinners in the 
 form of a testimony, there is no conceivable way in 
 which the blessings revealed in a testimony can be 
 received, but the reception of the testimony. Grace 
 and faith, standing equally contradistinguished from 
 works in the matter of justification, are in full har- 
 mony with each other; — so much so, that in the con- 
 stitution of the Gospel, according to the apostle, faith 
 is the appointed medium of justification, for the 
 very reason of its securing the undivided glory to 
 grace as the ground of justification. " It is of 
 faith," says he, "that it might be by grace," 
 Rom. iv. 16. 
 
 The doctrine of which I now speak is one of so 
 pervading a character in the Holy Scriptures, that, 
 
219 
 
 in adducing proofs, selection is the difficulty. I shall 
 satisfy myself with two passages, the first that pre- 
 sent themselves to memory. — " We who are Jews by 
 nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that 
 a man is not justified by the works of the law, but 
 by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed 
 in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the 
 faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law : for 
 by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified," 
 Gal. ii. 15, 16. " Therefore, by the deeds of the law, 
 there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by 
 the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the right- 
 eousness of God without the law is manifested, hav- 
 ing been witnessed by the law and the prophets ; 
 even the righteousness of God which is by faith of 
 Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that be- 
 lieve : for there is no difference; for ail have sinned, 
 and come short of the glory of God; being justified 
 freely, by his grace, through the redemption that is 
 in Christ Jesus ; whom God hath set forth, a propi- 
 tiation through faith in his blood, to declare his 
 righteousness for the remission of sins that are past 
 through the forbearance of God ; to declare at this 
 time his righteousness, that he might be just, and the 
 justifier of him who believeth in Jesus. Where is 
 boasting, then ? It is excluded. By what law ? Of 
 works ? Nay ; but by the law of faith. Therefore 
 we conclude, that a man is justified by faith, without 
 x 2 
 
220 
 
 the works of the law," Rom. iii. 20 — 28. — A law 
 is a divine institute. The " law of faith" is that 
 divine institute, according to which sinners are to be 
 justified by faith in the merits of another, and not 
 by any works of their own. This institute has all 
 the authority of a law. The "law of works" is that 
 divine institute, according to which life is promised 
 to personal obedience. On the terms* of this law it 
 was, that life was held originally ; and continued to 
 be held, till man became a sinner. It was not then 
 abrogated. Its requirements continued on God's 
 part, and its obligations on man's. But it could no 
 longer be the ground of acceptance. As soon as 
 human nature became a fallen, sinful, guilty nature, 
 the " law of works," in this view of it, as a means 
 of justification, was set aside for ever. It could only 
 condemn. The ''law of faith" took its place. So 
 that, as it had been the will of God, that man, in his 
 state of innocence, should hold life on the ground of 
 his own obedience, so was it the will of God, that 
 man, in his state of sin and guilt, should have life 
 restored to him on the ground of the merits of the 
 promised Mediator, and should obtain it by faith in 
 his name ; that he should be justified, not by works, 
 but by grace. Ever since the fall, this has been the 
 published will or law of heaven, in regard to sinful 
 men. Having forfeited life by the "law of works," 
 they can be justified only by the " law of faith/' — 
 
221 
 
 which, as we have seen, is the same thing with the 
 law of grace. This is God's authoritative appoint- 
 ment ; and he who contravenes it, and, by seeking 
 justification otherwise, breaks " the law of faith," is 
 as really a transgressor against the will of God, as 
 when, by eating the forbidden fruit, man originally 
 broke " the law of works." To sinners, then, justi- 
 fication by faith is God's law ; and it may, with per- 
 fect truth, be said, that grace is the law of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 I have adverted to Mr Barclay's distinction (a dis- 
 tinction, however, by no means peculiar to him) be- 
 tween the ivorks of the law, and the ivorks of the 
 Gospel ; the latter being the works which, he holds, 
 contribute to justification. Now, I know of no 
 works that are not works of law. Every good work 
 is a work of obedience ; and all obedience supposes 
 law. " Where no law is," there can be no obedience, 
 any more than there can be " transgression." The 
 distinction, then, cannot relate to the works them- 
 selves ; it must relate to the 'principle from which 
 they are performed. I can form no conception of 
 any other difference. Works of the law must be 
 works performed from a legal principle ; while works 
 of the Gospel are works performed from an evangeli- 
 cal principle. Let us see, then, on this supposition, 
 how matters will stand. I am naturally led by it to 
 observe, 
 
 t3 
 
222 
 
 4. Barclay's system, on this subject, is as full as it 
 can hold of inconsistency ivith itself. — To begin at 
 the point to which I have just adverted. Works of 
 the law do not contribute to justification ; works of 
 the Gospel do. If works of the Gospel do contri- 
 bute to justification, then it must be the design of 
 God, in the constitution of the Gospel, that they should, 
 And if so, the principle from which they are done 
 ought to be in accordance with that design ; they 
 ought to be done with a view to it; — with a view, that 
 is, to justification. But if they are done with this 
 view, they are, in the very principle of them, con- 
 verted into works of law. They involve, that is, the 
 palpable contradiction, of evangelical works done 
 from a legal principle. If it should be said, they 
 may contribute to justification, although not per- 
 formed with a view to it ; then it will follow, that it 
 is wrong to have our principles and motives of action 
 in conformity with the divine arrangement of means 
 and ends in the constitution of the Gospel ! — But 
 this is not all. According to Barclay, " protestants 
 are right in affirming" that " good works, wrought by 
 the Spirit of Christ, are rather an effect of justifica- 
 tion than the cause of it;" — and yet he himself af- 
 firms these works to be the " causa sine qua, non, 
 that is, the cause without which none are justified /" 
 But a cause must precede its effect ; and an effect 
 must follow its cause. If good works are the effect 
 
223 
 
 of justification, they cannot be its cause: — and if they 
 be its cause, they cannot be its effect. Even sup- 
 posing the idea of meritoriousness excluded from the 
 cause altogether; still there can be no excluding from 
 a cause of the idea of precedence ; nor from an ef- 
 fect, of the idea of sequence. If good works, there- 
 fore, be the " cause without which none are justi- 
 fied," — if in this sense, they be " necessary to justi- 
 fication, " — then they must exist before it : and if, on 
 the contrary, they be " rather the effect than the 
 cause," then they must be consequent upon it, and 
 can only exist after it. — And when, confounding jus- 
 tification with sanctification, or rather with regenera- 
 tion, he speaks of it as consisting in " the forma- 
 tion of Christ in us, born and brought forth in us. 
 from which good icorhs as naturally proceed as fruit 
 from a fruitful tree," — it takes the precedence of the 
 works, as the tree does of the fruits it produces. Yet 
 in the very next sentence he adds — " It is this inward 
 birth in us, bringing forth holiness and righteousness 
 in us, that doth justify us;" where it appears again 
 as a sequence ! — There is, in truth, in Mr Barclay's 
 representations of this subject, the most extraordinary 
 and inextricable confusion. We have justification as 
 the cause of good works, and good works as the 
 cause of justification ; — the cause the effect, and the 
 effect the cause ; — we are justified by faith, we are 
 justified by works, we are justified by both, and we 
 
224 
 
 are justified by neither; — we are justified by being 
 sanctified, and we are sanctified by being justified, 
 and justification and sanctification are one and the 
 same thing ! 
 
 This is not a caricature. Every distinct member 
 of the self-contradictory statement might be authen- 
 ticated by appropriate citations. And all this comes 
 of his mystical " inward light," and the vain attempt 
 to make the phraseology of Scripture, itself so dis- 
 tinguished for simplicity, quadrate with his necessa- 
 rily vague conceptions of this impalpable and sha- 
 dowy principle, — this " vehiculum dei" — this " real 
 spiritual substance, in which God and Christ are as 
 wrapped up," — " in which God, as Father, Son, and 
 Spirit, dwells," — which " subsists in the hearts of 
 wicked men even while they are in their wickedness," 
 —and which yet is " the spiritual body of Christ, 
 the flesh and blood of Christ, which came down from 
 heaven, of which all the saints clo feed, and are 
 thereby nourished unto eternal life I " It is thus that, 
 by a wretched perversion of the figurative terms of 
 Scripture, " the man Christ Jesus," the messenger 
 of the covenant, " Immanuel, God with us," " the 
 light of the world," is converted into a principle ; 
 and that principle, by some mystical inward opera- 
 tion (which can only be understood by experience, 
 but which, judging from the attempts actually made, 
 experience has never enabled any man to explain) 
 
225 
 
 '■' mediates, and atones" and renders " God propi- 
 tious" and " reinstates man in the holy image he 
 lias fallen from by sin !" So speaks William Penn ; 
 and, with hardly less mysterious obscurity, speaks 
 Robert Barclay, when he represents this " spiritual, 
 " heavenly, invisible principle, in which God, as 
 " Father, Son and Spirit dwells," as " a seed which 
 " of its own nature draws, invites, and inclines to God," 
 " a measure of which is in all men ;" so that, " when 
 " it is resisted Christ is said to be slain or crucified : 
 " and, on the contrary, as this seed is received in the 
 " heart, and suffered to bring forth its natural and 
 " proper effect, Christ comes to be formed and raised, 
 " of which the Scripture makes so much mention, 
 " calling it the new man ; Christ within, the hope of 
 " glory. This is that Christ within, which we are 
 " heard so much to speak and declare of, every where 
 " preaching him up, and exhorting people to believe 
 " in the light, and obey it, that they may come to 
 " know Christ in them, to deliver them from all sin" 
 And then — " As many as resist not this light, but 
 " receive the same, it becomes in them a holy, pure, 
 u and spiritual birth, bringing forth holiness, right- 
 " eousness, purity, and all those other blessed fruits 
 " which are acceptable to God : by which holy birth. 
 " to wit, Jesus Christ formed within us, and working 
 " his works in us, as we are sanctified, so are we 
 "justified in the sight of God" — Thus we are justi- 
 
226 
 
 lied, not by believing on the Christ who died on Cal- 
 vary, the atoning " Lamb of God which taketh away 
 the sins of the world," — but by receiving and cher- 
 ishing a mystical principle, called the " universal 
 light," the " saving light," the " Christ within :" — 
 and this being the new birth, we are justified by being 
 born again. — In contrast with ail this mysticism, so 
 unintelligible in itself, and so wide of the simplicity 
 of the Scriptures, it is refreshing to recur to the lu- 
 minous and truly evangelical representations of this 
 ail-important subject, from the pen of Joseph John 
 Gurney: — "Man by nature is the child of wrath. 
 * labouring under the curse of the law — the awful 
 " sentence of eternal death. What, then, can be 
 " conceived more adapted to his need, thsm justi/lca- 
 " tion — a plenary remission of all his sins through 
 " the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and a free aceept- 
 " ance of him as righteous, for the sake of a right- 
 " eous Saviour ? Here he finds reconciliation with 
 " a God of justice, deliverance from condemnation 
 " and eternal punishment, and a well-founded hope 
 " of immortal bliss. The utmost claims of the law 
 " are satisfied ; the holiness of the Creator is more 
 " than ever manifested ; and the broken-hearted sin- 
 " ner reposes in peace on the bosom of infinite mer- 
 " cy. In himself, indeed, as a transgressor from his 
 " birth, he is vile and polluted ; but, by the blood of 
 "Jesus sprinkled on his heart, his conscience is 
 
227 
 
 "purged from every dead work; and, having oi> 
 ' ; tained an interest in the Saviour of men, he wears 
 " a robe of righteousness in which there is no 
 " spot. God accepts him in the Beloved ; and 
 u adopts him, as a child of grace, and as an heir of 
 u glory."* 
 
 5. I have but one observation more to offer on 
 Mr Barclay's statements. It relates to the strange 
 misrepresentation of the doctrine of justification by 
 faith alone, without works, — as if it implied that 
 men might be justified by faith, continuing in sin. — 
 Thus, as a specimen of more to the same purpose : 
 — " This doctrine Luther and the protestants then 
 " had good reason to deny and oppose; though many 
 " of them ran into another extreme, so as to deny 
 " good works to be necessary to justification, and to 
 " preach up, not only remission of sins, but justifica- 
 " tion by faith alone, without all works, however 
 " good. So that men do not obtain their justifica- 
 " tion according as they are inwardly sanctified and 
 " renewed, but are justified merely by believing that 
 " Christ died for them : and so some may be per- 
 " fectly justified, though they be lying in gross 
 " wickedness ; as appears by the example of David, 
 " who, they say, was fully and perfectly justified, 
 
 * " Hints on the portable evidences of Christianity, by Joseph 
 John Gurney," p. 138. — as quoted by Richard Ball, in hi* 
 " Holy Scripture the Test of Truth." 
 
228 
 
 " while he was lying in the gross sins of murder and 
 u adultery." 
 
 But there cannot be a grosser slander of the pro- 
 testant doctrines than this. That in the wild ravines 
 of antinomianism, representations may be found, such 
 as afford too much countenance to the slander, is, I 
 am aw r are, too true. But still it is slander. If evan- 
 gelical protestants taught, that a sinner might be jus- 
 tified without being sanctified, — that there might be 
 pardon without penitence, — acceptance in the sight of 
 God, without regeneration and a new heart, there 
 would be ground for the charge. But it is not so ; 
 and Mr Barclay knew, or ought to have known, when 
 he wrote, that it was not so. Justification and 
 sanctification, though blessings distinct in kind, — the 
 one (as before explained) relating to change of state, 
 the other to change of character, — are yet, in point 
 of fact, inseparable in the sinner's experience. The 
 same faith of the gospel testimony which brings the 
 sinner into union with Christ, and gives him an in- 
 terest in his atonement and righteousness for the for- 
 giveness of his sins and his acceptance with God, 
 introduces, at the same time, into his heart the prin- 
 ciple of regeneration and progressive holiness. The 
 truth as it is in Jesus, which, under the teaching and 
 power of the Spirit, is the means of his regeneration, 
 being received into his heart by faith, continues to 
 operate there according to its own holy nature. 
 
229 
 
 " Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of 
 incorruptible, by the word of God" (immediately 
 afterwards interpreted of " the Gospel") " which 
 liveth and abideth for ever," — this " his seed remain- 
 eth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of 
 God." 1 Pet. i. 23, 25. compared with 1 John Hi. 
 9. The new nature, of which he then becomes the 
 partaker, is opposed to all sin, and, in the operation of 
 its principles, productive only of holiness. Sin, it is 
 true, remains ; but it belongs to the old nature ; and 
 it remains, because, in regeneration, the principles of 
 that nature are not annihilated, but only overpowered 
 and brought into subjection. — " There is therefore 
 now no condemnation to them who are in Christ 
 Jesus :" — this is justification ; and it is in virtue of 
 their being "in Christ Jesus'' that it is enjoyed; 
 faith so uniting them to him, that his righteousness 
 becomes theirs, as being that of their substitute : — 
 " Who walk, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit :" 
 this is sanctification ; and, according to the explicit 
 and universal testimony of scripture, none are " in 
 Christ Jesus," and of the number of those " to whom 
 there is no condemnation," who do not thus " walk 
 after the Spirit." — Justification is by faith ; but it is 
 by a faith that is always subsequently productive. 
 There is, in truth, no other. An unproductive faith 
 is no faith ; any more than an unproductive charity 
 is really charity. The faith that does not sanctify, 
 u 
 
230 
 
 we may at once conclude, has not justified ; for an 
 unsanctified believer is just as great an anomaly and 
 impossibility, under the gospel covenant, as a justi- 
 fied unbeliever. There are no good works without 
 faith ; and there is no faith without good works. — 
 How strikingly does the apostle Paul teach us the 
 double lesson, of the exclusion of all works from the 
 ground of our salvation, and yet the necessity of them 
 in all the saved, as the very fulfilment of God's pur- 
 pose in their new creation, when he thus sets the two 
 in immediate juxtaposition : — " For by grace are ye 
 saved, through faith ; and that not of yourselves, it 
 is the gift of God : not of works, lest any man should 
 boast. For we are his workmanship, created in 
 Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath be- 
 fore ordained that we should walk in them." Eph. 
 ii. 8 — 10. — The sinner, then, who presumes to give 
 his own works any place in the ground of his accept- 
 ance and salvation, — and the sinner who imagines 
 himself accepted and saved, without bringing forth 
 good works, — are equally in error. The one mis- 
 takes the foundation of gospel hope ; the other mis- 
 takes the nature of gospel salvation. The one, in 
 joining his own works with the righteousness of 
 Christ, unites what God has separated ; the other, in 
 fancying himself justified by Christ's righteousness, 
 while he has not been sanctified by Christ's Spirit, 
 separates what God has united. God " justifies the 
 
231 
 
 ungodly" — that is, no godliness of theirs, even sup- 
 posing they had it, enters into the ground of their 
 acceptance : — but he does not justify them, contin- 
 uing in their ungodliness. " The grace of God 
 which bringeth salvation — teacheth them, that, deny- 
 ing ungodliness and worldly lusts, they should live 
 soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world ; 
 looking for that blessed hope, even the glorious ap- 
 pearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ ; 
 who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us 
 from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar 
 people, zealous of good works. " Titus ii. 11 — 14. 
 
 I have dwelt long upon this subject ; because, in 
 the strictest sense of the term, it may be denomina- 
 ted fundamental; and because, from the writings of 
 Barclay and others of your older authors, there is 
 reason to fear that your " Society" has, to no incon- 
 siderable extent, been leavened with vague, and crude, 
 and unscriptural conceptions of it. I rejoice that 
 such a man as Joseph John Gurney has, by his pub- 
 lications, and otherwise, been exerting himself to 
 " purge out this old leaven," and in its room to sub- 
 stitute — not new, but still older, — the better leaven of 
 the doctrine of prophets and apostles. But, while he 
 states truth, why does he not more explicitly condemn 
 error? Why is he so chary in finding any fault with 
 the writers of his own body by whom the corrupt 
 leaven was introduced, and propagated, and fixed, — 
 u2 
 
232 
 
 writers from whom he differs so essentially, that, if his 
 doctrine be true and saving, theirs must be false and 
 perilous? Is it, that he is afraid of exposing to 
 question the doctrine of immediate inspiration, or 
 what, in more modified terms, he denominates " the 
 perceptible influence and guidance of the Spirit of 
 truth ?" If so, the course is not worthy of him. He 
 is sacrificing truth to unity; and to a unity, too, that 
 is not real, but external merely ; not a unity of sound 
 principle, but of expediency and esprit du corps; a 
 mechanical admixture of various and discordant ma- 
 terials, rather than an intimate, homogeneous, chemi- 
 cal affinity. The points of difference are of such a 
 nature and magnitude, as not to admit of neutrality, 
 or of compromise. No middle course can be steered 
 between them. If the views entertained by him of 
 the doctrine of justification be in harmony with the 
 mind of Christ, then must those of Penn and Bar- 
 clay be " another gospel. " The question, which of 
 the two is genuine Quakerism, is one of comparatively 
 little moment. But assuredly, the religious commu- 
 nity which harbours, and tolerates, and cherishes 
 both, is, in no trivial degree, " divided against itself;" 
 and, in such circumstances, infinite Wisdom has fore- 
 warned of the result. The attempt to maintain it in 
 vigour and prosperity, when the materials of it, com- 
 ing to light, are found to be so essentially and exten- 
 sively heterogeneous, is to " fight against God f for 
 
233 
 
 it involves unfaithfulness to truth, to Christ, to the 
 church, and to the souls of men. — If the doctrine of 
 justification by grace, through faith in the righteous- 
 ness and atonement of Jesus, be the " articulus 
 stantis ecclesice ;" then must the doctrine by which 
 justification is placed on any ground of human merit, 
 or on any thing else whatever than the divine virtue 
 of the Redeemer's mediatorial work, be the " articu- 
 lus cadentis ecclesice ;" — an element, in as far as it 
 exists, of decay and ruin. — In regard to those who 
 hold such an error, I cannot for a moment admit a 
 doubt, the apostle would have applied, in all its im- 
 perativeness, his injunction to Timothy — " From 
 such withdraw thyself/' 
 
 My next letter will consist principally of an ex- 
 amination of those passages of the Scriptures which 
 are usually adduced in support of your " inward 
 light." 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 R. W. 
 
 u3 
 
LETTER VII. 
 
 ON THE SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY PLEADED FOR 
 THE "INWARD LIGHT." 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 The confusion in Robert Barclay's mind, 
 by which, so very strangely, he has been led to con- 
 found and blend together, in his statements and illus- 
 trations, doctrines so palpably distinct as those of 
 justification and sancti/ication, may be traced, without 
 difficulty, as I have formerly hinted, to the predomi- 
 nant influence of his views of the " inward light," — 
 which, in his case, as in that of many more, only 
 
 — " led to bewilder, and dazzled to blind." 
 
 — That light, we have seen, consists not in the know- 
 ledge of any thing that is externally revealed, or that 
 comes to the mind of its possessor through any ex- 
 traneous channel. It is a principle within, common 
 to ail that are born into the world ; yet not inherited 
 or bestowed by nature, but the gift of the Holy Spirit, 
 and the fruit of Christ's mediation. Now, what I 
 
235 
 
 wish you particularly to notice at present is, that 
 according to the representations of your standard 
 writers, this light is at once, and equally, the law and 
 the Gospel. It is the discovery and rule of duty ; 
 and it is the means of salvation. Here lies, to no 
 inconsiderable extent, its deceptive influence on the 
 subject before us. It is the law, or rule of duty; and 
 by it, therefore, must be " the knowledge of sin :" — 
 and yet, although this is the very reason assigned by 
 the apostle why the law cannot justify, this light is 
 saving light. It imparts no knowledge of the Sa- 
 viour revealed in the Gospel testimony, — no know- 
 ledge of " the truth as it is in Jesus :" — and yet, — 
 although it is solely " the knowledge of the only true 
 God and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent" that is 
 " life eternal," — this light is saving light ; — light by 
 which all men are put into a capacity of salvation. — 
 How, then, does it save ? Seeing it reveals nothing 
 respecting any ground of pardon or acceptance with 
 God, beyond what exists in the sinner's own bosom, 
 it is no difficult matter to perceive the infallible 
 tendency ; leading precisely to the result apparent in 
 the confused conceptions of Barclay. How can it 
 save in any other way, than by some supposed opera- 
 tion in the sinner's mind and heart? And if so, then 
 there is evidently no room left for justification, — (in 
 the proper forensic sense of the term, as meaning 
 pardon, acquittal, acceptance before God,) — on the 
 
236 
 
 ground of a righteousness extraneous to himself; but 
 it comes, inevitably, to be confounded with personal 
 righteousness, or sanctification. The " inward light" 
 is conceived to impart the knowledge of duty, to- 
 gether with a certain favourable disposition towards 
 it, — a kind of constraining divine influence to what 
 is good, — which may, however, be resisted : — and, 
 according to Barclay, it is by conformity to this 
 knowledge, by following this disposition, by yielding 
 to this influence, that sinful men are justified. Now 
 it is by ascribing justification to this personal influ- 
 ence in the sinner's own mind, that Barclay, almost 
 of necessity, identifies it with sanctification. 
 
 Allow me to illustrate my meaning, and confirm my 
 charge, by a quotation, which will, at the same time, 
 serve as a specimen of his general principles of exposi- 
 tion on such subjects. — " This saving spiritual light is 
 " the gospel, which the apostle says expressly is preach- 
 " ed in every creature under heaven, even that very 
 " Gospel of which Paul was made a minister, Col. i. 
 " 23. For the Gospel is not a mere declaration of 
 " good things, being the power of God unto saiva- 
 " tion to all those that believe, Rom. i. 16. Though 
 " the outward declaration of the Gospel be taken 
 " sometimes for the Gospel, yet it is but figuratively, 
 " and by a metonymy. For, to speak properly, the 
 " Gospel is this inward power and life which preach- 
 " eth glad tidings in the hearts of all men, offering 
 
237 
 
 " salvation unto them, and seeking to redeem them 
 " from their iniquities ; and therefore it is said to be 
 " preached in every creature which is under heaven: 
 " whereas there are many thousands of men and 
 " women to whom the outward Gospel was never 
 " preached. Therefore the apostle Paul, Rom. i. 
 " where he says ' the Gospel is the power of God 
 " unto salvation/ adds, that ' therein is revealed the 
 " righteousness of God from faith to faith ;' and also 
 " < the wrath of God' against such as ' hold the truth 
 " in unrighteousness :' for this reason, saith he, be- 
 " cause that which may be known of God is mani- 
 u fest in them ; for God hath showed it unto them. 
 " Now that which may be known of God is known 
 " by the Gospel, which was manifest in them. For 
 " those of whom the apostle speaks had no outward 
 " gospel preached to them ; so that it was by the 
 " inward manifestation of the knowledge of God in 
 " the??i, which is indeed the Gospel preached in man, 
 " that the righteousness of God is revealed from 
 " faith to faith ; that is, it reveals to the soul that 
 " which is just, good, and righteous ; and that, as 
 " the soul receiveth it and believes, righteousness 
 " comes more and more to be revealed, from one 
 " degree of faith unto another. For though, as the 
 " following verse saith, the outward creation declares 
 u the power of God ; yet that which may be known 
 " of God is manifest within; by which inward mani- 
 
238 
 
 " festation we are made capable to see and discern 
 " the eternal power and Godhead in the outward cre- 
 " ation ; so, were it not for this inward principle, we 
 " could no more understand the invisible things of 
 " God by the outward visible creation, than a blind 
 " man can see and discern the variety of shapes and 
 " colours, or judge of the beauty of the outward 
 " creation." * 
 
 I do not remember if, within the compass of a 
 single page, I have ever met with a more extraordi- 
 nary tissue of blunders and inconsistencies. You 
 must allow me to state and expose them, seriatim ; 
 as this may furnish us with principles, such as will 
 facilitate the discussion of other passages of Scrip- 
 ture besides those here introduced. — Observe, then — 
 
 1. " This saving spiritual light is the Gospel"— 
 " even that very gospel of which Paul was made a 
 " minister." — If so, it must testify of Jesus : for the 
 Gospel of which Paul was made a minister, which he 
 had it in commission to preach, and which he " did 
 preach, warning every man and teaching every man 
 in all wisdom," was " the testimony of Jesus." He 
 " determined not to know any thing among his hear- 
 ers, save Jesus Christ and him crucified." It was a 
 testimony of facts and principles. If, therefore, the 
 inward light be " the very gospel whereof Paul was 
 
 * Apology, pages 167, 168. 
 
239 
 
 made a minister," then they who possess it must 
 possess the knowledge of " Jesus Christ and him 
 crucified," — the knowledge of the facts and princi- 
 ples contained in the divine testimony concerning 
 him. All mankind have the inward light ; all man- 
 kind, therefore, must have the knowledge of Jesus 
 Christ, — the knowledge of " the word of reconcilia- 
 tion, that God was in Christ reconciling the world 
 unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them ;" 
 for the ministry of Paul, as " an ambassador of Christ," 
 was to bear to his fellow-sinners the tidings of this 
 •• word of reconciliation." Is it, then, so ? Is the 
 whole heathen world in possession of the Gospel — 
 " the very gospel which Paul preached?" Paul 
 speaks to the Colossians of their having " heard this 
 gospel ;" and he dates its spiritual productiveness in 
 them from " the day they heard it, and knew the 
 grace of God in truth." Beyond all question, this 
 refers to the preaching of those who had first brought 
 them the glad tidings of salvation in the message of 
 the Gospel. But, if Barclay be right, they had the 
 Gospel before. It was no news to them. They had 
 it in the " spiritual saving light" — " the very gospel 
 of which Paul was made a minister." And so it is 
 with all mankind. So that, since the Gospel which 
 Paul preached is the Gospel which missionaries pro- 
 fess to preach, these heralds of the cross carry to the 
 heathen only what they already have ! On what 
 
240 
 
 ground can Robert Barclay, or any sober-minded 
 man, maintain this ? — Let us see. 
 
 2. " The Gospel is not a mere declaration of good 
 " things, being c the power of God unto salvation to 
 " every one that believeth.' " — Here are two state- 
 ments, of which it is not easy to say which is the 
 more extraordinary — First, that the Gospel is not a 
 mere declaration of good things ; and, secondly, that 
 this is proved from its being " the power of God unto 
 salvation !" — Now, in the first place, I know not what 
 else the Gospel is, than a " declaration of good 
 things." The entire language of the Scriptures so 
 describes it. The prophets anticipate it, as a mes- 
 sage to be brought by divinely commissioned ambas- 
 sadors : — " How beautiful upon the mountains are the 
 feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publish- 
 eth peace ; that bringeth good tidings of good, that 
 publisheth salvation, that saith unto Zion, Thy God 
 reigneth." * — And how speak the apostles themselves ? 
 " We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the 
 promise which was made of God unto the fathers, 
 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, 
 in that he hath raised up Jesus again. — Be it known 
 unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that through 
 this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of 
 sins : and by him all that believe are justified from 
 
 * Isa. Hi. 7. 
 
241 
 
 all things, from which ye could not be justified by 
 the law of Moses."* — " And I, brethren, when I 
 came unto you, came not with excellency of speech 
 or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony 
 of God. For I determined not to know any thing 
 among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified." f 
 — " Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the Gos- 
 pel which I preached unto you, which also ye re- 
 ceived, and wherein ye stand ; by which also ye are 
 saved, if ye keep in memory" (or rather, hold fast) 
 " what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed 
 in vain. For / delivered unto you first of all, that 
 which ye also received, how that Christ died for our 
 sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was 
 buried, and that he rose again the third day accord- 
 ing to the Scriptures." % — " That which was from the 
 beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen 
 with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our 
 hands have handled, of the Word of Life — that which 
 we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that 
 ye also may have fellowship with us ; and truly our 
 fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus 
 Christ. This, then, is the message, which we have 
 heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, 
 and in him is no darkness at all." § — In such terms 
 do the apostles invariably speak of the Gospel, — as 
 
 * Acts xiii. 32, 33; 38, 39. f l Cor - "• l > 2 - 
 
 i 1 Cor. xv. 1—4. § 1 John i. 1, 3, 5. 
 
 X 
 
242 
 
 a testimony, a message, received by them from God, 
 with a commission to declare it to men, — as, in a 
 word, " a declaration of good things." — And no proof 
 of the contrary can be more extraordinary than that 
 which Barclay adduces — namely its being affirmed to 
 be " the power of God unto salvation." For in what 
 connexions is it that this affirmation is found? What 
 is it that is affirmed to be " the power of God," 
 and " the power of God unto salvation ?" It is the 
 " testimony of Jesus" — the very u declaration of 
 good things" contained in the Gospel. Thus in 
 Rom. i. 15 — 17. " So, as much as in me is, I am 
 ready to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome 
 also : — for I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ; 
 for it is the power of God unto salvation to every 
 one that believeth." Does not the very phrase " to 
 every one that believeth," imply that there is some- 
 thing believed? — and what is that but the testimony, 
 the message, the declaration, delivered by the apos- 
 tles ? What that was, Paul had previously specified, 
 in regard to the facts of it — verses 1 — 4. " Paul, a 
 servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, sepa- 
 rated unto the Gospel of God, (which he had pro- 
 mised before by his prophets in the Holy Scriptures) 
 concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was 
 made of the seed of David according to the flesh, 
 and declared the Son of God, with power, according 
 to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the 
 
243 
 
 dead :" — and he farther specifies its leading and most 
 essential principle, — that which peculiarly constitutes 
 it " the power of God unto salvation" — when he says 
 of it — " For therein is the righteousness of God by 
 faith revealed to faith ;" — phraseology, of which Bar- 
 clay's anti-evangelical interpretation shall be duly 
 noticed immediately. — Thus again, in 1 Cor. i. 18 ; 
 22 — 24. " For the preaching of the cross is to them 
 that perish foolishness ; but to us who are saved it is 
 the power of God .*" — "we preach Christ crucified, 
 unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks 
 foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews 
 and Greeks, Christ the power of God. and the wis- 
 dom of God." — The simple testimony concerning a 
 crucified Saviour proved the mightily efficient instru- 
 ment, in accomplishing, what all the researches and 
 theories of human wisdom, after a trial of four thou- 
 sand years, had done nothing whatever to effect: — 
 " For, after that, in the wisdom of God, the world 
 by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God, by the 
 foolishness of preaching" (or the preaching of fool- 
 ishness — i. e. of what was so esteemed by the wise of 
 this world) " to save them that believe." 
 
 3. You may possibly think I am hardly doing 
 Barclay justice, when I represent him as adducing 
 the gospel's being " the power of God unto salvation" 
 in evidence of its being, in itself, something more 
 than " a declaration of good things." Let us hear 
 x2 
 
244 
 
 him, then, a little further : — " Though the outward 
 " declaration of the Gospel be taken sometimes for 
 " the Gospel, yet it is but figuratively, and by a me- 
 " tonymy. For, to speak properly, the Gospel is this 
 " inward power and life, which preacheth glad tidings 
 " in the hearts of all men, offering salvation unto 
 " them, and seeking to redeem them from their ini- 
 " quities !" — This is " confusion worse confounded.'* 
 — According to prophets and apostles, the Gospel is 
 a declaration of facts and principles ; the facts, of the 
 birth, the life, the death, and the resurrection of Je- 
 sus, — and the principles, involved in the representa- 
 tive and substitutionary character sustained by him, 
 and the ends for which, in this capacity, he lived, and 
 died, and rose again. The angels proclaimed the 
 Gospel, when they said, " Behold, we bring you glad 
 tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people; for 
 unto you is born this day in the city of David, a 
 Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." — The Saviour, 
 born in Bethlehem, bled and died on Calvary, " fin- 
 ishing the work which was given him to do ;" — and 
 was raised from the dead, in testimony of the divine 
 satisfaction in that work. When the apostle speaks 
 of the Gospel, — the declaration delivered by him and 
 others, respecting a dying and rising Saviour, — as 
 t; the power of God" — " the power of God unto sal- 
 vation," he is manifestly stating not what the Gospel 
 is, but what the Gospel does, — not its nature or pri?i- 
 
245 
 
 ciples, but its efficiency. It is by means of it that 
 God is pleased to " save them that believe f and it 
 is " the power of God," or God's mighty instrument, 
 in effecting this salvation, — salvation from the guilt 
 and from the power of sin. It " worketh effectually in 
 them that believe/' — This is simple. But what have 
 we in Barclay ? The most unaccountable inversion 
 of thought that ever occupied a sane mind. Look at 
 it. The Gospel is said by Paul to be " the power of 
 God :" — " it is the power of God unto salvation.*' 
 Mr Barclay, with the literality of a true papist, con- 
 cludes, that, since the Gospel is the power of God, 
 this power of God is the Gospel. The declaration, 
 or testimony, respecting " Christ crucified" is called 
 the Gospel only " by a metonymy;" " to speak pro- 
 perly, the Gospel is this inward power and life : '' — 
 that is, the Gospel is the energy which it exerts, — 
 the Gospel is the life which it instrumentally imparts. 
 Then we have this power, which is the Gospel, 
 preaching the Gospel : — for, says Barclay, " it 
 preacheth glad tidings in the hearts of all men;" 
 and what is the Gospel — what the very meaning of 
 the term — but glad tidings? And what are the glad 
 tidings which are preached in the hearts of men by 
 this " inward power and life ? " The answer is in 
 the words which follow : — " offering salvation unto 
 them, and seeking to redeem them from their iniqui- 
 ties ! " — so that the animated and triumphant state- 
 x 3 
 
246 
 
 inent of the apostle, respecting the divine efficiency 
 of the Gospel to the actual salvation of men, is re- 
 duced to a mere offer of salvation, and a mere moral 
 influence "seeking to redeem" them! — Is not this 
 — " first last, and last first?" — instead of beginning 
 with the offer and ending with the power, — begin- 
 ning with the power and ending with the offer ! 
 Truly, if this was all that Paul meant, he had little 
 to boast of in behalf of his gospel, or of the divine 
 wisdom by which it was devised. A power — a 
 power divine — terminating in an offer of salvation ! 
 — an " inward power," not actually redeeming, but 
 " seeking to redeem !" — and with what wonderful 
 efficiency, let the whole heathen world bear witness. 
 But, although offering and seeking were all that Bar- 
 clay had to claim in behalf of his " inward light,'' 
 they were not all that Paul had to claim in behalf of 
 his gospel ; and the contrast is sufficient evidence, 
 that the inward light of Barclay is not the gospel of 
 Paul. 
 
 4. There are some criticisms, which it is difficult 
 to refute, because of the very palpability of their 
 unsoundness. We feel, in attempting to meet them, 
 that we are not only letting down the dignity of cri- 
 tical science, but offering an affront to the under- 
 standings of our readers or hearers, in the implied 
 supposition of their needing to have the unsoundness 
 exposed. I cannot think the observation too severe 
 
247 
 
 in application to the criticism which makes the apos- 
 tle say that the Gospel was " preached in every 
 creature which is under heaven 1" — This is another 
 specimen of literal interpretation, which could never 
 have been adopted except under the prepossessing 
 influence of a previously assumed hypothesis. What- 
 ever be the true principle on which the universal 
 terms employed by the apostle are to be explained 
 (of which by and by) I would only put the question 
 to the candour of any of you who have paid atten- 
 tion to the language of the New Testament, whether, 
 when he speaks of the gospel being "preached" — 
 that is, published — proclaimed, — he had at all in his 
 mind the silent, secret, individual suggestions of the 
 t; inward light ?" When he speaks of preaching, 
 does he not invariably mean the declaration, in God's 
 name, by his commissioned ministers, of gospel facts 
 and gospel principles ? Can any passage be found 
 in his writings in which it has any other sense, or 
 from which it can be inferred that he considered 
 every man on earth as having a preacher of the gos- 
 pel within himself? Had that been true, then the 
 gospel must have been preached in the Colossians, 
 before it was preached to them. But the entire 
 strain in which he writes shows us, that he considered 
 them as having known nothing of the Gospel, till in 
 providence, it " came to them," by the labours of its 
 ministers, — till " the day they heard it, and knew the 
 
248 
 
 grace of God in truth/' through the instrumentality 
 of those who " went every where preaching the 
 word ;" and of whom the apostle specifies one by 
 name — " As ye also learned of Epaphras, our dear 
 fellow-servant, who is for you a faithful minister of 
 Christ." — Had it been true, moreover, we might well 
 ask what was Paul about? What was the use of all 
 his multiplied and indefatigable labours ? He was 
 busily preaching to men that which had already been 
 preached in them ; — and, since the inward is superior 
 to the outward, coming through no medium, but di- 
 rectly from the Spirit, — better preached than by 
 himself! Yes; better, on Mr Barclay's own repre- 
 sentation. The outward declaration, according to 
 him, is called the gospel only by a metonym}' ; the 
 " inward power and life" being the true and pro- 
 per gospel. They had, therefore, the reality before ; 
 and Paul brought them only the figure : — they had 
 what, " speaking properly," was the gospel ; and by 
 the preaching of the apostle they got only the meto- 
 nymy : — they had the "inward power and life" in 
 themselves ; and then, by Paul's ministry, came the 
 declaration to the ear! — Was this, then, do you really 
 think, what the apostle meant ? I appeal to his en- 
 tire writings for the answer. I could quote passage 
 after passage from each of his epistles, in proof that, 
 in his language, preaching has invariably the sense I 
 have assigned to it. I take one as a specimen ; and 
 
249 
 
 I select it for this very reason, that Mr Barclay at* 
 tempts to harmonize even it with his system ; and I 
 am anxious to show you with what palpable perver- 
 sion. The passage is Rom. x. 14 — IB. " How, then, 
 shall they call on him in whom they have not be- 
 lieved ? and how shall they believe in him of whom 
 they have not heard ? and how shall they hear with- 
 out a preacher ? and how shall they preach except 
 they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful upon 
 the mountains are the feet of them that preach the 
 gospel of peace, that bring glad tidings of good 
 things ! But they have not all obeyed the gospel 
 (the glad tidings.) For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath 
 believed our report ? So then faith cometh by hear- 
 ing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, 
 Have they not heard? Yes verily : their sound went 
 into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the 
 world." — Respecting this portion of Scripture, no- 
 thing, as it seems to me, can be plainer than the fol- 
 lowing positions. First, that the gospel of which he 
 speaks, as believed by some and disbelieved by 
 others, was the "testimony" or "glad tidings" de- 
 livered to men by the ministry of himself and his 
 fellow-ambassadors. He calls it, in verse 8, " the 
 word of faith ichich ice preach." Secondly, that this 
 testimony contained a declaration of facts, such as 
 never were made known to men in general by any 
 other description of ministry, or channel of commu- 
 
250 
 
 nication ; — never by that which you denominate the 
 14 inward light," or direct illumination of the Spirit. 
 These facts are, especially, the death and resurrec- 
 tion of Jesus Christ : — " if thou shalt confess with 
 thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine 
 heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou 
 shalt be saved," verse 9 ; the fact of God's raising 
 him from the dead implying, of course, the fact of 
 his previous death. Thirdly, that in order to these 
 facts, and the principles connected with them, being 
 known and believed, it was necessary that preachers 
 should be commissioned and accredited of God, so 
 that the testimony declared might appear as coming 
 from him, and resting on his authority — " How shall 
 they hear without a preacher ? and how shall they 
 preach except they be sent?" — that is, sent, or com- 
 missioned, not by men, but by God. — I conceive the 
 leading object of the apostle, in the passage, to be — 
 to place the new or Gospel dispensation on an equa- 
 lity, in regard to its divine authentication, with the ' 
 old or legal dispensation ; that of the apostles, witli 
 that of the prophets. The one must have its di- 
 vinely accredited messengers, as well as the other. 
 It must not be said of the preachers of the new 
 covenant, " I have not sent these prophets, yet 
 they ran ; I have not spoken to them, yet they 
 prophesied." This seems the import of the ques- 
 tion " How shall they preach except they be sent?" 
 
251 
 
 They whose feet, upon the mountains, brought the 
 " glad tidings of good things/' were ambassadors 
 commissioned by Jehovah, and bearing his creden- 
 tials, as the ancient prophets did. The subsequent 
 verses, when correctly translated, are designed to 
 confirm this sentiment. It should be noted, that the 
 word rendered by our translators, in verse 17th, 
 " hearing" is the same word which, in verse 16th, is 
 translated " report." It is quite true, that " faith 
 cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God;" 
 that is, that the word of God must be preached be- 
 fore it can be heard, and heard before it can be be- 
 lieved : — nor do I deny, that this is in perfect har- 
 mony with the spirit of the preceding context — 
 " How shall they believe in him of whom they have not 
 heard ? and how shall they hear without a preach- 
 er?" The true rendering, however, appears rather 
 to be, in harmony with the view just given of the 
 apostle's design — " But they have not all obeyed the 
 gospel; for Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our 
 report? So then, faith cometh by a report, and the 
 report by the word — (that is, by the authority or 
 command) — of God." This rendering makes no 
 material difference on the meaning of the first clause ; 
 inasmuch as the Report must necessarily be brought 
 to the ear and heard, in order to its being believed. 
 But in the second clause, it gives an interesting and 
 important addition to the sense, — namely, that the 
 
252 
 
 Report, by the hearing of which it is that faith com- 
 eth, is published by the authority or command of 
 God. This is all simple and consistent. Let us 
 see how the passage is disposed of by Barclay : — 
 " But the apostle Paul opens and illustrates this mat- 
 " ter yet more, Rom. x. where he declares that the 
 " word which he preached (now the word which he 
 ;i preached, and the gospel which he preached, and 
 " whereof he was made a minister, is one and the 
 66 same) ' is not far off, but nigh in the heart and in 
 " the mouth:' which done, he frameth, as it were, the 
 " objection of our adversaries in the 14th and 15th 
 " verses — ' How shall they believe in him of whom 
 " they have not heard ? and how shall they hear 
 " without a preacher?' This he answers in the 18th 
 " verse, saying, ; But I say, have they not heard ? 
 " Yes, verily; their sound went into all the earth, and 
 " their words unto the ends of the w 7 orld ;' insinuat- 
 " ing that this divine preacher had sounded in the 
 " ears and hearts of all men ; for of the outward 
 " apostles that was not true, neither then, nor many 
 " hundred years after; yea, for ought we know, there 
 " may be yet great and spacious nations and king- 
 " doms, that never have heard of Christ or his apos- 
 " ties, as outwardly." * — " This divine preacher :" — 
 that is the inward light ! Now, my friends, I must 
 
 ' Apology, page 71. 
 
253 
 
 frankly confess to you, that I should feel it quite a 
 hopeless task to argue with any man, who, in sober 
 earnest, after admitting that " the word which Paul 
 preached and the gospel which Paul preached, and 
 whereof he was made a minister, is one and the same," 
 can contend, that the preaching of this gospel, spoken 
 of by the apostle, means the preaching of it, in the 
 minds of mankind universally, by the " inward light." 
 For observe : — if there be a difficulty in accounting for 
 the universality of the expressions, as opposed to the 
 fact that so many thousands and millions of mankind 
 " have never heard of Christ or his apostles as out- 
 wardly ;" the difficulty is not less which is involved 
 in the assertion that the gospel preached by Paul is 
 universally preached by the light within. Nay, the 
 difficulty is still greater : — for, whereas, in the one 
 case, it is denied that the gospel was actually preached 
 by the apostles to all, — we feel ourselves warranted, 
 distinctly to deny, in the other case, that this gospel 
 is preached by the " light within" to any. We know 
 how extensive, how general and indiscriminate, was 
 the proclamation of the gospel by the apostles and 
 other heralds of salvation : — but can one solitary in- 
 stance be adduced of the " universal inward light" 
 imparting to the human mind the knowledge of the 
 facts, and principles, and promises of that gospel? 
 To what man on earth has the " faithful saying and 
 worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came 
 
 Y 
 
254 
 
 into the world to .save sinners," been made known 
 by the inward light, independently of the written or 
 preached word? In what heathen country has there 
 ever been found, otherwise than as the result of mis- 
 sionary embassies, the knowledge that " Christ died 
 for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he 
 was buried, and that he rose again the third day ac- 
 cording to the Scriptures ?" I repeat what I have 
 said, that, whatever difficulty there may be in recon- 
 ciling with fact the affirmed universality of the preach- 
 ing of the Gospel in apostolic times, that difficulty is 
 in no respect lessened by introducing, as a preacher, 
 the " inward light ;" inasmuch as not an individual 
 of those who did not receive the knowledge of the 
 gospel by the external ministry of the servants of 
 Christ, ever obtained that knowledge by the internal 
 ministry of the light: — no, not one. The introduc- 
 tion of this imaginary preacher makes no difference 
 in the case whatever ; — unless any one will under- 
 take to prove, that mankind universally have all along 
 been in possession, before, and during, and since, the 
 apostolic embassy, of " the knowledge of the only 
 true God and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent " 
 a position, of which the successful proof would, at 
 the same time, nullify the utility and the worth of 
 that embassy, by showing that the blessing intended 
 to be imparted by it was already possessed ! 
 
 5. Of the correctness of the statement we have 
 
255 
 
 made, that it is not the gospel of Christ that is made 
 known by the " inward light," we have, alas ! mel- 
 ancholy evidence in Mr Barclay's own representa- 
 tion. Mark how it is, according to him, that the 
 " inward power and life," preaching in every crea- 
 ture, operates to salvation : — " Those," says he, " of 
 " whom the apostle speaks had no outward gospel 
 " preached to them ; so that it was by the inward 
 " manifestation of the knowledge of God in them, 
 " which is indeed the gospel preached in man, that 
 " ' the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to 
 M faith ;' that is, it reveals to the soul that which is 
 "just, good, and righteous; and that, as the soul 
 " receiveth it and believes, righteousness comes more 
 " and more to be revealed, from one degree of faith 
 " unto another." — Never, surely, was there a more 
 flagrant misappropriation of evangelical terms to an 
 anti-evangelical purpose. " The righteousness of 
 God by faith,'' — " the righteousness of God revealed 
 to faith" — are phrases of which the meaning cannot 
 be misunderstood by the careful student of Paul's 
 writings. They are used by him to designate that 
 imputed righteousness, of which I have spoken at 
 large in my last letter, — the righteousness provided 
 by God for the justification of sinners ; — " even the 
 righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus 
 Christ, unto all, and upo?i all them that believe :" — 
 the righteousness of which he says, in terms formerly 
 y2 
 
256 
 
 explained — " God hath made him who knew no sin to 
 be sin for us, that we might be made the righteous- 
 ness of God in him;" — and which was the object of 
 his own supreme desire — " Yea, doubtless, and I 
 count all things but loss for the excellency of the 
 knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord ; for whom I 
 have suffered the loss of all things, and do count 
 them but dung, that I may win Christ and be found 
 in him ; not having mine own righteousness which is 
 of the law, but that which is by the faith of Christ, 
 even the righteousness which is of God by faith." — 
 But, according to Barclay, and in harmony with his 
 identification of two things so distinct in their nature 
 as the blessings of justification and sanctification, — 
 " the righteousness of God revealed to faith" is the 
 discovery to the mind of " that which is just, good, 
 and righteous," — in personal character and conduct ; 
 a discovery which, in the following page, he identifies 
 with " knowing by that inward law, and manifesta- 
 tion of the knowledge of God in them, to distinguish 
 betwixt good and evil!" — And this is the way in 
 which, according to your standard authority, the 
 " inward light" preaches the Gospel, — " preaches 
 glad tidings in the hearts of all men,'' — preaches 
 what Paul preached ! I at once deny this to be the 
 Gospel at all ; and am verily persuaded, that the 
 apostle of the Gentiles, the great inspired champion 
 of justification by grace through faith, would have 
 
257 
 
 u shaken his raiment/' and indignantly disowned the 
 comment, as at utter variance with the doctrine it 
 was meant to illustrate, and as dictated by another 
 spirit than that which he had himself received. — 
 There can be little difficulty, to be sure, in explain- 
 ing universal terms when used respecting the disse- 
 mination of the Gospel, — if we are allowed to con- 
 sider the universal knowledge of that Gospel — " the 
 very Gospel which Paul preached, and of which he 
 was made a minister" — as resolvable into the same 
 thing with a universal sense of right and wrong, or 
 an acquaintance (and even that sadly partial) with 
 the rule of duty. 
 
 6. There remains to be noticed, in this extraordi- 
 nary passage of the Apology, yet another singular 
 instance of the " confounding of things that differ." 
 He applies to the discoveries of the inward light, the 
 terms which are employed by Paul with relation to 
 the manifestation of Deity in his works : — " For 
 " though, as the following verse saith, the outward 
 " creation declares the power of God, yet that which 
 " may be known of God is manifest within : by 
 ; ' which inward manifestation we are made capable 
 " to see and discern the eternal power and Godhead 
 " in the outward creation ; so, were it not for this 
 " inward principle, we could no more understand the 
 " invisible things of God by the outward visible crea- 
 " tion, than a blind man can see and discern the va- 
 y 3 
 
258 
 
 " riety of shapes and colours, or judge of the beauty 
 " of the outward creation. Therefore he saith, first, 
 " that which may be known of God is manifest in 
 " them ; and in and by that they may read and un- 
 " derstand the power and Godhead in those things 
 " that are outward and visible." — Let us analyse this 
 a little. — 1. When the apostle says, " That which 
 may be known of God is manifest in them, — for 
 God hath showed it unto them ;" he immediately 
 explains the meaning of its being " shown unto 
 them" by adding — " For, since the creation of the 
 world, the invisible things of God, even his eternal 
 power and Godhead, are clearly seen, being under- 
 stood by the things that are made : so that they are 
 without excuse." This is the manifestation, or 
 " showing," meant by the apostle. When, therefore, 
 Barclay says — " Now that which may be known of 
 God is known by the Gospel, which was manifest in 
 them ;" — he not only misappropriates terms, — he 
 misapprehends the entire strain and purport of the 
 apostle's reasoning, and nullifies its conclusiveness. 
 The object of the apostle manifestly is, to demon- 
 strate the inexcusableness of the Heathen in their 
 ignorance of God, notwithstanding the knowledge of 
 Him originally possessed, and the clear manifesta- 
 tions, subsisting amongst them, in endless variety, in 
 all the works of his hands and ways of his providence ; 
 their sinful alienation from God, as displayed in this 
 
259 
 
 ignorance, and in the practical results of it afterwards 
 enumerated ; and their consequent need of the mer- 
 ciful provisions of the Gospel. So far is he from af- 
 firming that they had the Gospel already, and the 
 knowledge of God communicated by it ; that his pre- 
 cise and exclusive aim, from the 18th verse of chap- 
 ter i. to the 9th verse of chapter iii. is to establish the 
 universal sinfulness and guilt of Gentiles and of Jews ; 
 and, having established this point, he deduces from 
 it, as to both, the impossibility of justification by 
 works, and the necessity of the grace provided by 
 the Gospel, — that grace, the exercise of which to 
 sinners of mankind it was the grand object of the 
 Redeemer's mediation to render consistent with the 
 demands of the divine law, and the glor} T of the divine 
 righteousness. — 2. Barclay speaks of the " inward 
 manifestation" as indispensable to our at all per- 
 ceiving and understanding the outward, — equally in- 
 dispensable to our " seeing and discerning the eter- 
 nal power and Godhead in the outward creation, '' — 
 as sight is to the discernment of colour and beauty. 
 If so, it follows, that the possession of this " inward 
 manifestation'' is necessary to men's aecountable- 
 ness for their ignorance of God, and to their being, 
 what the apostle declares they were, " without ex- 
 cuse." And what is this inward manifestation ? It 
 is " the inward manifestation of the knowledge of 
 God in them, which is indeed the Gospel preached 
 
260 
 
 in man. 1 ' It comes, then, to this : — that the know- 
 ledge of God, and the knowledge of him by the Gos- 
 pel, is necessary to render the ignorance of him in- 
 excusable ! — Nor is the case much mended, in regard 
 to the common sense of it, when we are told that 
 " those Gentiles, of whom the apostle speaks, knew 
 by that inward law and manifestation of the know- 
 ledge of God in them, to distinguish betwixt good 
 and evil:" — for, taking this view of the " inward 
 manifestation," what have we ? — Why, the know- 
 ledge of God and of the conduct he requires of us, 
 necessary to our being capable of discerning the out- 
 ward evidences of his existence ! — Did I speak too 
 strongly, when I said, that this " inward light" 
 " leads to bewilder?" Here, as on some other oc- 
 casions, it appears involving in inextricable perplexi- 
 ty, and that too on points in themselves character- 
 ized by their simplicity, — an otherwise sensible and 
 acute mind ; confounding in it law and gospel, na- 
 ture and grace ; misplacing the grounds of human 
 responsibility ; and embarrassing with an anomalous 
 intricacy the very simplest principles of evidence. 
 
 Well, you may say ; be it so : — but still, after all 
 you have said, the universal terms employed by the 
 apostle remain unaccounted for. How is it, that he 
 speaks of the Gospel as having been " preached to 
 every creature which is under heaven,'' when, in 
 point of fact, there were so many millions of the hu- 
 
261 
 
 man race, who had not at the time, and who have not 
 even yet, obtained the knowledge of it ? — I answer, 
 first of all, that, whatever difficulty exists, it is not- 
 diminished, although it may be shifted, by the intro- 
 duction of your universal preacher, the light within ; 
 inasmuch as, whatever this preacher taught, it never 
 made known, to a single individual, a single fact, or 
 a single principle, of that gospel which Paul repre- 
 sents as having been preached to all. The introduc- 
 tion, therefore, of the " inward light" brings the 
 statement no nearer to an accordance with fact, — if 
 the fact stated be indeed absolute universality. There 
 is, in truth, no ground whatever, on which it can be 
 so understood. To suppose the apostle to have 
 meant this, at the very time when he was himself 
 busily engaged in carrying the Gospel to new sta- 
 tions, — in breaking up new ground for the seed of 
 the word, — is to suppose him to write, not only with- 
 out extraordinary inspiration, but without ordinary 
 understanding. His own language is — u Yea, so 
 have I strived to preach the Gospel, not where 
 Christ was named, lest I should build upon another 
 man's foundation ; but, as it is written, To whom he 
 was not spoken of, they shall see; and they that have 
 not heard shall understand," Rom. xv. 20, 21. And 
 he was still in the indefatigable prosecution of the 
 same work, when, three or four years after, he wrote 
 his Epistle to the Colossians. His language, in 
 
262 
 
 both his epistles, — and indeed in all of them, the ear- 
 liest and the latest alike, — is the same as to the uni- 
 versality of the proclamation of the Gospel ; than 
 which we could not desire a clearer evidence that 
 he did not intend it to be taken in its strict and li- 
 teral acceptation. — I might avail myself of the fact, 
 that, in ordinary practice, both in speech and in 
 writing, phrases expressing universality are used in 
 an indefinite or general sense, when the meaning 
 intended to be conveyed is, not all without exception, 
 but simply a large proportion, or, even more limited- 
 ly, a great many. Thus, when it is said, Mat. iii. 
 5, 6. that there went out to John the Baptist " Je- 
 rusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round 
 about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, 
 confessing their sins," — no more is meant than, in 
 the language of Luke, " the multitude that came 
 forth to be baptized of him," Luke iii. 6. But, with- 
 out insisting upon this, observe more particularly — 
 1. The terms in which the commission, as given 
 at different times to the apostles, expresses the ex- 
 tent of their duty. Mark xvi. 15. " Go ye into all 
 the world, and preach the gospel to every creature? 
 Matth. xxviii. 19. " Go ye, therefore, and teach all 
 nations? Luke xxiv. 47. " That repentance and re- 
 mission of sins should be preached in his name, 
 among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Acts 
 i. 8. " Ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jeru- 
 
263 
 
 salem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto 
 the uttermost part of the earth? — Now, it will not 
 surely be contended, that by the apostles personally, 
 during their own lives, all this, in the strict accepta- 
 tion of the terms, was to be done. If so, a commis- 
 sion was given them, which it was not within the 
 bounds of possibility for them to execute ; and they 
 failed — necessarily failed — to fulfil their charge. 
 But this would not be doing justice either to them 
 or to their Master. He did not enjoin impossibili- 
 ties ; nor were they unfaithful to their trust. The 
 language must be understood, not of what they were 
 personally to effect, but of the ultimate design^ in 
 regard to the gospel. It expresses what Dr S. H. 
 Cox happily calls " the catholic largeness of the new 
 dispensation." 
 
 2. Each of the different phrases, employed in the 
 different forms of the commission, is used by the 
 apostle Paul in stating the fact of its apostolic exe- 
 cution. Thus in Col. i. 6. "Which is come unto 
 you," (he speaks of " the word of the truth of the 
 gospel,'") "as it is in all the world;" — Col. i. 23. 
 " Which ye have heard, and which was preached to 
 every creature which is under heaven : — Rom. xvi. 26. 
 " But now is made manifest, and — according to the 
 commandment of the everlasting God, made known 
 to all nations for the obedience of faith :" — Rom. x. 
 18. " Have they not heard? Yes, verily: their sound 
 
264 
 
 went into all the earth, and their words to the €?ids 
 of the world" — Now, if the phrases, when used in 
 giving the commission, signified, and could signify, 
 no more, in regard to the personal ministry of the 
 apostles, than that they should proceed, in that min- 
 istry, on the 'principle of universality, — that their field 
 should be the world, — that they should proclaim the 
 gospel, with which they were put in trust, to men of 
 all nations indiscriminately, — making their aim, in 
 harmony with the divine purpose, the evangelization 
 of mankind ; — -then, when the same phrases are used, 
 to express the execution of the commission, they 
 ought to be interpreted on the same principle, as 
 conveying no more than that they were acting up to 
 the full spirit of the charge given them, — that, to 
 the utmost limit of their personal ability, during their 
 own span of life, they " made disciples of all nations," 
 and st preached the gospel to every creature," — 
 leaving the further prosecution of the same work, — 
 the following out of the purpose of the crucified and 
 glorified Redeemer, — to the pious and benevolent 
 zeal of his ministers and people in after ages ; and, 
 at the same time, that, even during the period of 
 their own ministry, they had made rapid and widely 
 extended advances. 
 
 3. In harmony with this remark, it may be ob- 
 served, that the very phraseology used in the com- 
 mission, and in the record of its fulfilment, is em- 
 
265 
 
 ployed on occasions when absolute or literal univer- 
 sality is out of the question. Thus in Jer. xxvii. 7. 
 it is said that " all nations " should be subject to the 
 king of Babylon, and that God would punish every 
 nation that refused to receive his yoke : — in Dan. ii. 
 38, 39. the dominion of the same king of Babylon 
 is represented as extending " wheresoever the children 
 of men dwell;" and the third kingdom that was to 
 arise after his (the Macedo-Grecian) as " bearing 
 rute over all the earth :" — in Dan. iv. 22. the empire 
 of the Babylonian monarch is described as reach- 
 ing "to the end of the earth:" — in the decree of Cyrus, 
 Ezra i. 2. that prince says, " The Lord God of hea- 
 ven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth:" — 
 in Math. xxiv. 9. our Lord tells his twelve apostles 
 that they should be "bated of all nations for his 
 name's sake;" yet they themselves could not be hated 
 beyond the limits to which their ministry extended, 
 — which affords a further proof of the general and 
 undefined sense in which the terms of their commis- 
 sion ought to be interpreted : — in Rev. xiv. 8. Baby- 
 lon is said to have " made all nations to drink of the 
 wine of the wrath of her fornication ;" and in chap, 
 xviii. 23. "all nations" are affirmed to have been 
 rt deceived by her sorceries:" — in Rom. xi. 12, 15. 
 the apostle, speaking of the fall and rejection of the 
 Jews, says — " If the fall of them be the riches of 
 the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of 
 z 
 
266 
 
 the Gentiles, how much more their fulness !" — and — 
 " If the casting away of them be the reconciling of 
 the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life 
 from the dead?" — This last is an important passage. 
 It is a clear instance of " the world" being used for 
 " the Gentiles ;" and that, not in the sense of abso- 
 lute universality, but indefinitely : — for, had it been 
 used in the sense of absolute universality, it is evi- 
 dent that the effect expressed as arising from the 
 "casting off" of the Jews would have been the great- 
 est possible; so that the predicted effect of their "re- 
 ception" or restoration, could not have gone beyond 
 it; for what can go beyond absolute universality? — 
 what can comprehend more than the whole ? No proof 
 can be clearer than this, that, in the apostle's lan- 
 guage, when the gospel is said to have " come in all 
 the world," he is to be understood as speaking of 
 the Gentiles in the same indefinite way — of men of 
 all nations, indiscriminately, becoming partakers of 
 its tidings and its blessings.* And in the other pas- 
 sages cited, we have evidence equally satisfactory, 
 that the phrases, " all nations," " all the earth," " the 
 ends of the earth," " all the kingdoms of the earth," 
 
 * I have avoided reference to other passages in which the 
 word " World" occurs, because, though they might have served 
 my purpose, the word so translated is not the same as that used 
 in the apostolic commission, Mark xvi. 15. which is xotr^oi. 
 
267 
 
 &c. are susceptible (and that is all we need) of the 
 same indefinite application. 
 
 In extending so much my observations on this 
 subject, I have borne in mind that I am writing to 
 Friends, with whom the universality of the terms, 
 and the inconsistency of such universality with the 
 literal fact as to the outward gospel, form together 
 one of the main grounds for the introduction of the 
 " inward light," as the only means of bringing the 
 statement and the fact into harmony. But into lit- 
 eral harmony it does not, in reality, bring them. It 
 leaves the difficulty just where it found it. For I 
 must again challenge all the Friends on earth to pro- 
 duce an instance, in which this inward light, — this 
 universal preacher, — has made known the gospel 
 contained in the apostolic testimony, — has made it 
 known, either in its facts or in its doctrines ; — a sin- 
 gle instance, in which a sinner, independently of all 
 outward means, has learned from it, that Jesus Christ 
 " was delivered up for our offences, and raised again 
 for our justification.'' And the sinner who has not 
 learned this, has not learned the gospel. Even what- 
 ever benefit he may be supposed indirectly to de- 
 rive from it, under the new covenant system of 
 mercy, still it cannot, without an unwarrantable abuse 
 of terms, be spoken of as having been preached either 
 to him or in him. 
 
 Another reason for extending my observations on 
 z2 
 
268 
 
 Mr Barclay's commentary on the passage in the first 
 chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians, has been, 
 that they have a bearing on the explanation of other 
 texts which are referred to in support of the univer- 
 sal inward light; — and more especially on what I 
 may justly call your text of texts, — that which has 
 been quoted as one of the main pillars of your system, 
 by every Friend, from the days of George Fox to 
 the present hour. — John i. 9. "that was the true 
 
 LIGHT, WHICH LIGHTETH EVERY MAN THAT COM- 
 ETH into the world." — Allow me now a few ad- 
 ditional observations on this text ; — a text to which 
 all others may fairly be considered as, to such a de- 
 gree, subordinate, that, if this be satisfactorily dis- 
 posed of, there is not one of them that can stand for 
 a moment in our way. 
 
 Before proceeding to these, it may not be unsea- 
 sonable to put you on your guard against a tendency 
 of the mind, from which we are all at times, in danger, 
 — the tendency, I mean, of the habitual use of parti- 
 cular phraseology so to fix a certain sense of it in our 
 thoughts, as to render it superlatively difficult to dis- 
 lodge it. It is like drawing out a thread that crosses 
 and re-crosses, in every possible direction, the entire 
 texture of our system, and enters into every figure 
 in the pattern. Here, I am persuaded, (you must 
 excuse me for saying it, for the apprehension is found- 
 ed in those natural tendencies which are common to 
 
269 
 
 you with myself,) will be found to lie, with many of 
 you, the principal hinderance to conviction. " The 
 light which lighteth every man that cometh into the 
 world," is a phrase which, since the very rise of your 
 community, has been so appropriated to a certain 
 sense, and in that sense has been so invariably used, 
 in publications, in preaching, and in daily converse, 
 that I have every allowance to make for the strong 
 hold it must have taken of your minds, and the te- 
 nacity of your predilections in its behalf. — I trust, at 
 the same time, that, with regard to any critical stric- 
 tures I may now offer on the passage, you will give 
 me credit, for the bond fide conviction that they are 
 founded in the law and usage of the original Greek, 
 and supported by their analogy to the same evan- 
 gelist's style of expression in other places, and are 
 not, in any degree, invented to serve a purpose. — 
 You will do me the further justice of taking them in 
 connexion with my former general reasonings on the 
 subject of the " inward light" — which it is impossible 
 now to resume, — as well as with what has just been 
 advanced on Col. i. 23. and Rom. x. 14 — 18. — and 
 especially on the frequently restricted, or general and 
 indefinite, use of universal terms. 
 
 In our received version of John i. 6 — 10. there 
 
 occur several supplements. Now, it will not be 
 
 questioned by any critic, that, when a passage can 
 
 be simply and literally rendered without such sup- 
 
 z3 
 
270 
 
 plements, the rendering is entitled to preference. If 
 any one, then, acquainted with Greek, and with the 
 peculiarities of this evangelist's style, will take up the 
 original, and lay aside entirely the present punctua- 
 tion, (in which, I need not tell you, there is no au- 
 thority,) he will, I am persuaded, be satisfied, that 
 the following is the correct rendering of the verses : 
 — " There was a man sent from God (or sent forth 
 by God) whose name was John. The same came 
 for a testimony,* that he might bear witness concern- 
 ing the light, that all through him might believe. 
 He was not himself the light, but was to bear wit- 
 ness concerning the light. The true light, which 
 lighteth every man, coming into the world, was in 
 the world, and the w ? orld was made by him, and the 
 world knew him not."f 
 
 * E/j /uagrvgiocv — I have rendered this literally : paprv^ia sig- 
 nifies, not the witness, but the testimony delivered by the wit- 
 ness. John came, to deliver a testimony, as immediately ex- 
 plained in the next clause. — Probably, indeed, our translators 
 used the word witness here in the sense of testimony ; since they 
 have done so repeatedly elsewhere, and the word still retains its 
 double meaning. See for examples, John v. 31 — 36. Titus i. 
 13. 1 John v. 9, &c. 
 
 f The words in the original are these, and are here pointed 
 agreeably to the version of them in the text : — 6. Eysvsro «v^w- 
 ^«j a.'7n(TTaXfj(,tvo? <7Tclpcl hov, ovo/xoc ocurco lajavvvis. 7. Ouro$ n\fa\> 
 ng /uaprvpiav, ha ftaorvprio"/) vngi rov <pcoro$, tvot, vravrzs vriffrtveojo-i 
 l>i ocurou, 8. Ovtc nv ixuvo$ to $&>$, aXX' ha poipTv pr^n vrtgt tcu 
 (p&jros yv. 9. To <pa$ to ak'/ifavou, o Qur^u vravra civfyojtfov, £%%o- 
 uivov zi; tov xoo-pov, 10. sv too xoo-pu yv, x«< o H0<rt*a$ oi clvtcj 
 
271 
 
 You will perceive, that (with a number of emi- 
 nent critics,) I consider the words " coming into the 
 world" as more naturally connected with the word 
 Lights than with the word man. My chief reason 
 for thinking so is, — not that, when connected with 
 " every man," the words are pleonastic ; for it would 
 be far from being a solitary instance of pleonasm in 
 the style of this writer ; — besides that the pleonasm, 
 in this instance, might be used to give particularity 
 and emphasis to the " every man," strengthening the 
 idea of its being without exception.* — My reason is 
 rather, the correspondence of the words, when joined 
 to " the true light" with the phraseology of this 
 writer, on the same subject, at other times, and 
 
 iyivzro, fccci o KOffpo; avrov oux zyvoj. — The placing of the r,v, 
 which, according to the common punctuation, begins verse 9th, 
 at the end of verse 8th, precludes the necessity both of the sup- 
 plement " icas sent " in the eighth, and of the more anomalous 
 supplement of the demonstrative pronoun " that " in the ninth ; 
 and, at the same time, by furnishing a nominative to the verb 
 " was" in the beginning of the tenth verse, clears the construc- 
 tion of all embarrassment. I submit, too, whether the to%oftivov 
 u$ rov xoc/xov, sv reo xoffftop >;v, — when connected with the to <$&>;, 
 be not quite in accordance with the ordinary style of this evange- 
 list. I grant, however, that the ig%ofA&vov may be joined with 
 either avfyuzrov or <pa>s. The reasons for joining it with the lat- 
 ter are assigned in the text. 
 
 * The use of the phrase, in connexion with avfywrov, by the 
 Rabbinical writers has also been pleaded in support of our au- 
 thorized translation. No great stress, however, can be laid upon 
 this. The idiom is certainly neither common in the scriptures, 
 nor in classical authors. 
 
272 
 
 with that of the sacred penmen in general. " Com- 
 ing into the world" is a phrase of such frequent 
 application to the Messiah, as to be almost a de- 
 scriptive designation of him. " Then these men, 
 when they had seen the miracle which Jesus did, 
 said, This is, of a truth, that prophet that should 
 come into the world" — " For judgment am I come 
 into this world, that they who see not might see, 
 and that they who see might be made blind :" — 
 " She saith unto him, Yea, Lord; I believe that thou 
 art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come 
 into the world :" — "I came forth from the Father, 
 and am come into the world; again I leave the world, 
 and go to the Father :" — " To this end was I born, 
 and for this cause came I into the world, that I should 
 bear witness unto the truth :" — " This is a faithful 
 saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ 
 Jesus came into the world to save sinners:" — "Where- 
 fore, when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacri- 
 fice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast 
 thou prepared me."* — And more particularly is it 
 deserving of notice, that the phrase occurs in con- 
 nexion with the same designation of the Messiah as 
 that in John i. 9. " I am come a light into the world, 
 that whosoever followeth me should not walk in dark- 
 ness :" — " This is the condemnation, that light is 
 
 * John vi. 14. ix. 39. xi. 27. xvi. 28. xviii. 37. 1 Tim. i. 
 15. Heb. x. 5. 
 
273 
 
 come into the world, and men loved darkness rather 
 than light, because their deeds were evil."* — If you 
 take these parallel passages together, you will see 
 reason to think, with me, that the s^^s^v u$ *ov zorpov 
 — the " coming into the world," was much more 
 probably meant by John, in the text under consider- 
 ation, to be connected with " the true light" than 
 with the " every man." — I might quote, along with 
 these, those places in which Jesus is spoken of as 
 having been sent into the world ; that phrase being 
 a precise counterpart to his coming into the world. 
 But it is unnecessary. I may, however, add, that 
 the phraseology before us in this text, — " The true 
 Light — coming into the world, was in the world/' — 
 that is, was in the world in this capacity or relation, 
 — corresponds with the repeated language of our 
 Lord himself, as put into his lips by the same evan- 
 gelist : — " Then said Jesus to them again, I am the 
 Light of the world :" — " As long as I am in the 
 world, I am the light of the world." f — These consid- 
 erations bring it, in my mind, if not to an absolute 
 certainty, yet as near to a certainty as possible, that 
 the translation proposed of John i. 9. is the correct 
 one. 
 
 But supposing this to be the case, you may allege, 
 we have still the affirmation that this Light " lighteth 
 
 * John xii. 46. iii. 19. f John viii. 12. ix. 4. 
 
274 
 
 every man!' — " The term ' every man,' " you may 
 be disposed to say, " is in itself very strong and pre- 
 " cise. It denotes every individual man; and, since 
 " there is nothing in the context to limit its signifi- 
 " cation, it must be considered as signifying the whole 
 "of mankind!'* — You must, however, be sensible, 
 that the transference of the phrase " that cometh into 
 the world" from this connexion to connexion with 
 " the Light" takes off not a little from the emphasis 
 with which the idea of universal individuality (if I 
 may so express myself) is conveyed. I hope you 
 will not be tempted by this consideration — or, if 
 tempted, will not yield to the temptation — to resist 
 the evidence by which the transference appears to 
 be so clearly warranted, and, from attachment to 
 your master principle, as well as from the force of 
 habit, — the habit both of thought and speech, — to 
 stickle for the old way. — "Every man" is, I grant 
 you, a universal phrase. But that it is not, in the 
 present instance, to be taken in the strict and literal 
 sense of absolute universality, — as meaning every in- 
 dividual of mankind, without exception, the following 
 considerations may serve to prove ; and they will, at 
 the same time, bring to the proof the above assump- 
 tion of Mr Gurney, that " there is nothing in the 
 context to limit its signification." 
 
 * Joseph John Gurney. 
 
1. We have instances, in the style of this evan- 
 gelist, of phrases employed in a general sense, — to 
 signify what was the ordinary or prevailing fact ; 
 which are so far from being without exception, that 
 exceptions are mentioned by himself, even though 
 with the appearance of contradiction. One of these 
 occurs in the very verses that follow the text under 
 consideration. " The true light — was in the world, 
 and the world was made by him, and the world knew 
 him not. He came unto his own, and his own re- 
 ceived him not. But as many as received him, to 
 them gave he power to become sons of God, even to 
 them that believed on his name." — " The world knew 
 him not" — " his own received him not/' The de- 
 signations are universal, according to their respective 
 subjects; — " the world" meaning mankind, and " his 
 own" the 'people of the Jews, his " kindred according 
 to the flesh." The remark I now make is not at all 
 affected by the question, whether the verses relate to 
 " the Word" in his divinely pre-existent state, or to 
 " the Word made flesh." The remark is, that the de- 
 signations are used indefinitely, as expressive of the 
 general fact ; but not without exceptions. There were 
 those in " the world,'' — there were those among " his 
 own," who did know him, — who did receive him; for 
 " to as many as received him, to them gave he power to 
 become the sons of God." — We have another instance, 
 of a similar kind, in chap. iii. 32, 33. " That which 
 
276 
 
 he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth ; and no 
 man receiveth his testimony. He that hath received 
 his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true." 
 Here, it is obvious, the "no man'' (ouhi$, no one) is 
 not to be understood literally and absolutely, but in 
 the same indefinite or general sense — comparatively 
 few. "Very few," says Mr Scott, " and, as it were, 
 none, compared with the whole nation, received his 
 testimony." — " No man," we might say, — " no one" 
 " is in itself very strong and precise. It denotes no 
 individual" Yet we see we should be mistaken in 
 so understanding it. In John's phraseology, " No 
 man receiveth his testimony" does not mean that 
 every individual rejected it :— " the world knew him 
 not" does not mean that none of the world knew him : 
 " — his own received him not" does not mean that 
 none of his own received him. 
 
 2. The very phrase, in all its pointedness and pre- 
 cision — Travroc uvfycotrov — is at times used with an obvi- 
 ously limited application. So the apostle Paul em- 
 ploys it, Col. i. 2. " Whom we preach, warning every 
 man, and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we 
 may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus." — 
 What means the apostle by this " very strong and 
 precise' 7 phrase? Not surely, that, in point of fact, 
 he actually warned and taught " every individual 
 man T No : but that every man was embraced in 
 his wishes, and every man faithfully warned and 
 
277 
 
 taught whom he could, by any means, bring within 
 the reach of his influence. — Yet it cannot be affirmed 
 that, in this case, there is any thing " in the context 
 to limit its application." The Apostle is speaking at 
 the time of the universality of the gospel. He had 
 used the very words which, we have seen, Barclay 
 interprets as expressing its absolute and individual 
 universality — representing it as " preached to every 
 creature which is under heaven ;" and had then spo- 
 ken of the " mystery" (or revealed secret) of its 
 divinely purposed extension, in all its privileges and 
 blessings, to the Gentiles. There is nothing, then, 
 to limit the import of the " every man," but the ac- 
 tually known and limited extent of the Apostle s min- 
 istry. Why, then, should not the terms, in the text 
 on which we are commenting, be understood with a 
 similar limitation ? " There is nothing in the con- 
 text to limit its application," says Mr Gurney. Sup- 
 posing this were true, may not the same obvious 
 principle of limitation find a legitimate place in this 
 case as in the other? Should it not be understood as 
 limited by the actual extent to which the light spoken 
 of has shone ? — Do not say, my friends, that this is 
 to beg the question, by assuming that it has actually 
 shone only to a limited extent. — For observe — 
 
 3. The only ground on which Friends can main- 
 tain its universality is — its being an inivard, not an 
 outward light]; and the only ground on which they 
 2a 
 
278 
 
 can maintain its being an inward light is its affirmed 
 universality. It is a light, they say, which " lighteth 
 every man :" — but the outward light of the Gospel 
 does not lighten every man : — therefore the light 
 spoken of cannot be the outward light of the Gospel, 
 or Christ as the mere subject of the Gospel testi- 
 mony ; it must be an inward light, — for in this sense 
 only can it be possessed by all, — can it shine in all, 
 — can it lighten all. — Now, this is to beg the ques- 
 tion. We affirm, on the contrary, that the light 
 spoken of in the passage is not an inward light, — 
 that it is an outward light ; — that this is a plain mat- 
 ter of fact ; and that in conformity with this ought 
 the terms of universality, used regarding it, to be 
 interpreted, The Light is Christ. It is a per- 
 son ; distinguished from John, who " was not him- 
 self the light, but was sent to bear witness of it :" — 
 and we know to whom he bore his testimony, and 
 assigned the honour. We have seen too, how Jesus 
 appropriates the designation to himself: — "I am the 
 light of the world ;" — " I am come a light into the 
 world ;" — " As long as I am in the world, I am the 
 light of the world." He was so, by the full and clear 
 discoveries which it was the object of his mission to 
 make, — and to make, not to the Jews alone but also 
 to the Gentiles, — of truths which had been but par- 
 tially and obscurely revealed to the one, and respect- 
 ing which the other, during preceding ages, had lain 
 
279 
 
 m the darkness of ignorance. It is true, that the 
 Eternal Word had been the medium of Divine com- 
 munications to men, in as far as these had been 
 vouchsafed, from the beginning. But still, his per- 
 sonal mission and ministry are represented as the 
 period of illumination ; the period of which this same 
 inspired evangelist says, " The darkness is past, and 
 the true light now shineth." Hence the distinction 
 between the "times past" as the times in which 
 " God in sundry portions and in diverse manners 
 spake unto the fathers by the prophets" and " these 
 last days," in which He " hath spoken unto us by 
 his Son!' Passages might be multiplied that speak 
 of the superior light of divine discovery emanating 
 from this point. " No man hath seen God at any 
 time : the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom 
 of the Father, he hath declared him :" — u And thou, 
 child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest ; for 
 thou shalt go before the face of the Lord, to prepare 
 his ways ; to give knowledge of salvation to his peo- 
 ple by the remission of sins ; through the tender 
 mercies of our God, whereby the day-spring from on 
 high hath visited us ; to give light to them that sat 
 in darkness, and in the shadow of death, to guide 
 our feet into the way of peace :" — " Be not thou, 
 therefore, ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor 
 of me his prisoner ; but be thou a partaker of the 
 afflictions of the gospel, according to the power of 
 2 a2 
 
280 r : 
 
 God : who hath saved us, and called us with an holy 
 calling, not according to our works, but according 
 to his purpose and grace, which was given us in 
 Christ Jesus before the world began ; but is now 
 made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus 
 Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought 
 life and immortality to light through the gospel." * 
 ■ — The prophets had predicted the coming of Christ 
 under the same image, as the rising of a light upon 
 a world of darkness : — " The people that sat in dark- 
 ness saw a great light ; and to them that sat in the 
 region of the shadow of death light is sprung up." 
 And in similar terms, the aged and devout Simeon, 
 anticipating, with benevolent joy, the illumination of 
 the world, as well as exulting in the honour put upon 
 his own people in the birth of the infant Redeemer, 
 and ultimately to arise to them from his mission and 
 work, speaks of him as Jehovah's " salvation, which 
 He had prepared before the face of all people, a light 
 to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of his people 
 Israel." — Such passages of Scripture evidently re- 
 present Christ as a Light of discovery and manifesta- 
 tion of truth, — making God known, — making salva- 
 tion known, — making the way of peace known, — 
 making life and immortality known, — with a clear- 
 ness and a fulness with which they never had been 
 
 * John i. 18. Luke i. 76—79. 2 Tim. i. 8—10. 
 
281 
 
 made known before, even to those who had been 
 favoured with divine revelation ; — and making them 
 known to others, of whom it could not, or hardly 
 could, be said that they had any previous knowledge 
 of them whatever, — " darkness covering the earth, 
 and gross darkness the people." — When Friends, 
 then, speak of the " Christ within," and the " inward 
 light," they use phraseology that is not at all in har- 
 mony with these representations. They speak of a 
 light which, instead of arising at a predicted period, 
 to dispel the previous darkness, had been actually 
 enjoyed by all mankind from the beginning ; and 
 they speak, moreover, of a light, which, though thus 
 possessed by all before and by all since the fulness 
 of time, has in no one instance imparted to any mind 
 a single discovery of that truth which Jesus Christ 
 came to reveal, and the revelation of which it is that 
 constitutes Him " the Light of the world." The 
 " portion of the light of the Spirit of Christ" which, 
 according to Mr Gurney, is imparted to every man, 
 does not, most assuredly, and according to his own 
 admissions, communicate to those who possess it any 
 such discovery. How, then, can they, in any pro- 
 priety of speech, be said to be " lighted" by the true 
 Light, when, in point of fact, they are in utter- 
 darkness with regard to what he came to reveal, and 
 the revelation of which it is that, chiefly at least if 
 not exclusively, obtains him the designation. If the 
 2a 3 
 
282 
 
 only principle on which the Friends can give con- 
 sistency to the universal terms employed by the 
 evangelist, is a principle which either, converting the 
 Christ who died on Calvary into a mystical abstrac- 
 tion, supposes a " Christ within" independently of 
 all knowledge of the Christ without, — or assumes a 
 " light within' imparted from Christ " the true 
 Light," which leaves those who possess it in entire 
 ignorance of Himself and of every truth which he 
 came to make known to men, — I must be allowed 
 to regard it as a principle altogether inadmissible in 
 sound and rational interpretation, and involving diffi- 
 culties incomparably greater than any with which 
 they can show our explanation of such terms to be 
 embarrassed. 
 
 4. The representation of " every man that cometh 
 into the world" as "lighted by the true Light;" — 
 or, in other terms, (which in the phraseology of the 
 Friends are equivalent) the representation of every 
 man as having the Spirit of Christ, or as having Christ 
 within — is at variance with the whole language of 
 the Bible, and with not a few of its most explicit and 
 pointed declarations. — First, it is out of harmony 
 with the current language of Scripture, to speak of 
 " every man that cometh into the world" as actually 
 lighted by the true Light. In addition to the passages 
 already quoted, which represent mankind as in dark- 
 ness, multitudes more of a similar character might 
 
283 
 
 be adduced. But allow me to request your attention 
 to the statement in verse 5. of this same chapter — 
 " The Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness 
 comprehended it "not." On the precise import of the 
 verb rendered u comprehended" I do not dwell. 
 It is by some translated " apprehended," by others 
 " admitted." The question I have to ask you is one 
 which is unaffected by this point of verbal criticism. 
 It is this : — if it be indeed true that the illumination 
 diffused by the " True Light" is universal, — if every 
 man is actually enlightened by it, and enlightened 
 inwardly, — where and in whom is it that " the Light 
 shineth in darkness ?" If the true light lighteth 
 every man born into the world, then every man born 
 into the world is in light ; none of all mankind are 
 in darkness. But the very purpose of the Gospel is 
 declared to be " to turn men from darkness to light:" 
 — and believers are said to have been " once dark- 
 ness" but now to be " light in the Lord," — " called 
 out of darkness into God's marvellous light." When 
 we regard Christ as the Light, and as shining by the 
 dissemination of truth amidst the darkness of spirit- 
 ual ignorance and depravity, the meaning of such 
 language is plain. No one is at a loss to understand 
 it. But the consistency and propriety of it are de- 
 stroyed, when we are taught to believe that all men 
 already have the light, — the light of Christ, — saving 
 light, — the light of the very gospel which Paul 
 
284 
 
 preached. To apply such terms to the heathen, is 
 not only to burlesque the very name of light, — re- 
 ducing it absolutely to nothing ; it is contrary to the 
 entire style, on such subjects, of the divine word. — 
 The same observation is true respecting the " Christ 
 within/' If every man born into the world has 
 Christ within him, how is it that the apostle speaks 
 of those who had heard the Gospel from himself and 
 his fellow-ministers, as having, previously to their 
 receiving it, been " without Christ ?" — and how 
 comes " Christ in them the hope of glory" to be 
 their distinction from others who remained in unbe- 
 lief? — What, too, are we to think of the affirmation 
 that all have the Spirit of Christ, when our Lord 
 himself, in promising his Spirit to his disciples, gives 
 the promise with so special a restriction to them in 
 contradistinction from the world,- — " even the Spirit 
 of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it 
 seeth him not neither knoweth him ; but ye know 
 him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall he in you ;' 
 — and when the possession of his Spirit is pronounced 
 the only sure evidence of vital union with himself, 
 and the absence of his Spirit the evidence of the 
 contrary — " Ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, 
 if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you : now 
 if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none 
 of his ?" If " a measure of the light of the Spirit 
 of Christ" is given to every man, who are they who 
 
285 
 
 have not his Spirit ? — " Because ye are sons, God 
 hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, 
 crying, Abba, Father." If all have a measure of the 
 Spirit of Christ, what becomes of this peculiarity 
 and test of Sonship ? Is it to be found only in the 
 degree of the divine communication ? If so, at what 
 point in the scale is the evidence of Sonship to be 
 fixed ? There is no hint of such restriction, either 
 in this text or in any other. To have the Spirit, is 
 to be a child of God; to be without the Spirit, is to be 
 a child of the wicked one. " Hereby know we that 
 we dwell in Him, and He in us, because he hath given 
 us of his Spirit:" — " These are they who separate 
 themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit" And to 
 have the Spirit is to have the earnest of heaven ; the 
 evidence of Sonship being the pledge of the paternal 
 inheritance : — " Now he who stablisheth us with you 
 in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God ; who hath 
 also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in 
 our hearts :" — " In whom also having believed, ye 
 were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise; which 
 is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption 
 of the purchased possession, to the praise of his 
 glory." — Are all mankind, as the common partakers 
 of Christ's Spirit, children of God and heirs of 
 glory ? 
 
 Few things have surprised me more than the use 
 made by Friends of the words of the apostle Paul 
 
286 
 
 in 1 Cor. xii. 7. " But the manifestation of the Spirit 
 is given to every man to profit withal." This has 
 been a favourite text with Friends from the begin- 
 ning till now. Like John i. 9, it has been quoted 
 by all their writers, so far as I am aware, from George 
 Fox to the anonymous author of " Truth Vindicated." 
 By this latter author it is still quoted, with the em- 
 phasis of Italics upon every man. That " there can 
 " be no higher rule than the Scriptures," he affirms, 
 " is not what Christ taught, — is not what the apos- 
 "tles taught, — is not what Fox, and Penn, and 
 " Barclay, and Fisher taught : — no — they taught, 
 '•'that Christ was * the way, the truth, and the life;' 
 " — that ' no man cometh unto the Father but by the 
 " Son ;' nor * knoweth him but he to whom the 
 " Son will reveal him :' they taught, that Christ was 
 " ' that Light which enlighteneth every man that 
 " cometh into the world ;' and that ' a manifestation 
 " of his blessed Spirit is given to every man to profit 
 " withal. '*— I have found it very difficult to per- 
 
 * Truth Vindicated — Second Edition, page 5. When, in an 
 early part of these Letters, I referred to this Work, the refer- 
 ence was to the First Edition, the second not having then ap- 
 peared. — I take this opportunity of asking the author, with all 
 seriousness, whether he intended the Preface to the second 
 edition to be an evidence to his readers of his " having received, 
 not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God ?" I 
 cannot bring myself to believe, that Friends in general can ap- 
 prove of the temper of mind in which that Preface is written. 
 
287 
 
 suade myself, that any man, of ordinary understand- 
 ing, can look at the context in which these words 
 stand, and for one moment retain the conviction, if 
 he had it before, that they have any reference what- 
 soever to mankind at large. It is no better than 
 empty bluster, to talk about the necessity of taking 
 divine declarations as we find them, and not laying 
 the terms of them under restrictions of our own. 
 We do take them as we find them. We do not lay 
 them under restrictions of our own. It is an essen- 
 tial and invariably admitted canon of all rational 
 criticism, that universal terms are to be understood 
 as limited by the subject or the persons spoken of. 
 Those, therefore, who insist upon understanding 
 
 There was not a little of the same spirit in the work itself. Was 
 it under the influence of elation of mind at the success of his 
 first edition, that in his Preface to the second the author has so 
 far surpassed himself in this "bad eminence?" If he fancies 
 himself entitled, as an inspired man, to use towards ministers 
 and Christians of other denominations, who presume to differ 
 from him, the same style of address that was used to the Scribes 
 and Pharisees by Christ and his forerunner, or to Elymas the 
 sorcerer by the apostle Paul, — he only furnishes an additional 
 exemplification of the melancholy delusiveness of all such pre- 
 tensions to inspiration. I will not farther characterise the 
 spirit of this production ; because I could not apply to it the 
 epithets by which alone it could be truly described, without 
 seeming as if I had imbibed it myself: — which may God's own 
 Spirit ever prevent ! — It appears to be a matter of dubiety 
 whether the author be himself a Friend, — that is, a member 
 of the Society. I hope he is not. He himself " does not feel 
 at liberty " to resolve the doubt. 
 
288 
 
 " every man'" as meaning every man of all mankind, 
 bring themselves under obligation to show, that it is 
 of all mankind the apostle is at the time speaking. 
 Will any one attempt to show this? Not if he 
 wishes to retain his credit for a sound mind. The 
 limitation is not ours ; it is the apostle's own. He 
 speaks, throughout the chapter, of " the Body of 
 Christ" — that is, of the Church. He speaks of those 
 who " by one Spirit had been all baptized into one 
 body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or 
 free ; and had been all made to drink into one Spirit." 
 Does this description comprehend " the whole world" 
 — the world that " lieth in the wicked one ?" — Here, 
 then, is one limitation ; and a limitation quite suffi- 
 cient for our purpose: — for even if "every man" 
 were to be understood of every individual member of 
 the collective body spoken of, it would still be exclu- 
 sive of all others, and so nothing to the purpose as 
 a proof of the absolute universality of the Spirit's 
 " manifestation." But even this latitude of inter- 
 pretation is wider than the occasion either requires or 
 warrants. It is not of the ordinary saving influences 
 of the Spirit the apostle is speaking ; — it is of what 
 he himself denominates " spiritual gifts," — gifts 
 which, in a sense still higher than the others, were 
 supernatural, — which were, indeed, strictly and pro- 
 perly, miraculous. Now, there is the clearest possi- 
 ble evidence, that these were not possessed by every 
 
289 
 
 individual member even of the collective body to 
 whom the apostle writes. No one can doubt this 
 who reads the chapter. That which the apostle 
 intends to express in this particular verse is, not the 
 universality of the " manifestation" of the Spirit, but 
 the design for which it was given ; and the obvious 
 meaning of his words is neither more nor less than 
 that, in every instance of its bestowment, it was 
 given " to profit withal," — that is, not for the pur- 
 pose of self-display or personal aggrandizement, but 
 for the edification of the church, and the advance- 
 ment of the cause of truth. The sentiment is, not 
 that "the manifestation of the Spirit was given to every 
 man ;" but that in the case of every man to whom it 
 was given, it was given for this end. — Nothing in lan- 
 guage is more common than this mode of speech. 
 Mr Newton is perfectly right in the example by 
 which he illustrates it : — " The emphasis is on the 
 " words to profit withal. If I were to say ' Riches 
 " are given to every man to use aright,' I surely 
 " should not be understood to mean that every man 
 " in the world was rich." Certainly not ; but only 
 that every man to whom riches are given has them 
 bestowed upon him for their appropriate uses : — and 
 the mode of expressing the sentiment would be un- 
 objectionably correct. The interpretation put upon 
 the words by Friends in general is one of the most 
 extraordinary instances I have ever met with of sac- 
 2 B 
 
290 
 
 rificing sense to sound, — of wrenching words from 
 the connexion in which they stand, and by which 
 their true import ought to be determined, and affix- 
 ing to them, in their insulated state, a meaning as 
 foreign as possible to the writer's purpose, but suit- 
 able to our own. Aware, however, of the power of 
 custom, as already adverted to, in fastening such in- 
 terpretations in the mind, I feel it necessary (I cer- 
 tainly should not otherwise) to present you with one 
 or two parallel cases, — cases in which the phrase 
 " every man" has a similar limited meaning, — limited, 
 not only to the particular body or community spoken 
 of, but to a specific description of individuals belong- 
 ing to it. — In the law of the Jubilee, Lev. xxv. 10. 
 you find these words : — " And ye shall hallow the 
 fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the 
 land, unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a 
 jubilee unto you ; and ye shall return every man 
 unto his possession, and ye shall return every man 
 unto his family." It would be just as reasonable to 
 interpret the " every man" here as meaning every 
 man of the whole human race, as it is to interpret 
 it so in the words of the apostle now under examina- 
 tion : — and yet it not only does not mean this, — it 
 does not even mean every man of all Israel, — but 
 only every man in the circumstances for which the 
 law provided, — every man who was in servitude, 
 every man who had been disinherited, every man 
 
291 
 
 who had been alienated from his kindred. The 
 apostle's words no more signify that " every man" in 
 the world, or every man in the church, had " the 
 manifestation of the Spirit," than these words sig- 
 nify that every man in the world, or every man in 
 Israel, was in one or other of the conditions men- 
 tioned. — Take another example from Paul himself. 
 It occurs in 1 Cor. iii. 5 — 13. " Who, then, is Paul, 
 and who is Apollos, but ministers, by whom ye be- 
 lieved, even as the Lord gave to every man :" — 
 " Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one; 
 and every man shall receive his own reward accord- 
 ing to his own labour :" — " According to the grace 
 of God given to me, as a wise master-builder, I have 
 laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon : — 
 but let every man take heed how he buildeth there- 
 upon :" — " Every man's work shall be 'made mani- 
 fest ; for the day shall declare it : — and the fire shall 
 try every man's work, of what sort it is." — I need 
 not say, that in these verses " every man" neither 
 signifies every man of mankind, nor every man of 
 the Christian church, but only every man of the min- 
 istry of that church, and perhaps still more restrict- 
 edly (at any rate with a speciality of reference to 
 them) every man of those ministers who had been, 
 who were, or who might be, engaged in building up 
 the church at Corinth, of which he had himself laid 
 the foundation. 
 
 2 b 2 
 
292 
 
 The author of " Truth Vindicated" affirms the 
 apostolic doctrine to be, that " a manifestation of the 
 blessed Spirit is given to every man to profit withal." 
 In so quoting the apostle's words, he does not inten- 
 tionally misquote them, but only writes them in the 
 Quaker form under the power of Quaker habit. The 
 use of the indefinite article — " a manifestation" — 
 renders the statement more loose and general, and 
 brings it more into conformity with Quaker sentiment, 
 — taking off that definiteness of expression which 
 confines the reference to some special mode or modes 
 of the Spirit's influence. The apostle's own words 
 are — " The manifestation of the Spirit;" and he 
 specifies what he means by enumerating the various 
 " spiritual gifts," or supernatural endowments, which 
 then existed in the Christian church, — under desig- 
 nations of which, I doubt not, each would be dis- 
 tinctly understood then, though now, with regard to 
 some of them, we can get no further than more or 
 less plausible conjecture : — " For to one is given by 
 the Spirit the word of wisdom ; to another the word 
 of knowledge by the same Spirit ; to another faith 
 by the same Spirit ; to another the gifts of healing 
 by the same Spirit ; to another the working of mir- 
 acles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of 
 spirits ; to another diverse kinds of tongues ; to an- 
 other the interpretation of tongues: but all these 
 worketh that one and the self-same spirit dividing to 
 
293 
 
 every man severally as he will." This is " the ma- 
 nifestation of the Spirit," as then subsisting, in his 
 various miraculous powers ; and the important sen- 
 timent is, — a sentiment requiring to be inculcated on 
 the Corinthian church, where a strong tendency had 
 discovered itself to a vain ostentation and abuse of 
 their gifts, — that on whomsoever any one or more of 
 these gifts were bestowed, according to the sovereign 
 pleasure of the divine agent, he who received them 
 was to consider them as conferred for the general good 
 — " to profit withal." But what connexion this has 
 with the notion of every man on earth having " a 
 manifestation" — a portion — a measure — of the Holy 
 Spirit, — /am unable, and I am not without the hope 
 that you too may now be unable, to discern. 
 
 5. I have only, then, to observe, in the last place, 
 on John i. 9. that when " the true light which, com- 
 ing into the world, was in the world" is represented 
 as " lightening every man," the idea which the words 
 are chiefly intended to convey appears to be that of 
 universality of design. It is a light for all men ; for 
 Gentile as well as for Jew. Christ is " the light of 
 the world!" There is no appropriation of this light, 
 as there was of the light of revelation before the ful- 
 ness of time, to any one people, or to any one class 
 or description of mankind. "Every man" is alike 
 welcome to its illuminating, cheering, guiding, puri- 
 fying influence. — There is another idea which is evi- 
 2b 3 
 
294 
 
 dently to be associated with this. It is the idea of 
 exclusiveness. It is the light, — the true light; 
 designations which are equivalent to its being the 
 only light : — and the meaning is, not that every 
 man without exception is actually enlightened by it, 
 — but that every man who is enlightened, has his 
 light from it alone. It is the only true, the only di- 
 vine source of saving knowledge to men. — I present 
 you with a case which, in the spirit of it at least if 
 not in the letter, is parallel. In Rom. iii. 23, 24. 
 the apostle says — " All have sinned and come short 
 of the glory of God ; being justified freely by his 
 grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Je- 
 sus." It will not be denied, that when he says " all 
 have sinned," the universality expressed is absolute : 
 — it relates to mankind, — to Jews and Gentiles alike; 
 and admits of no exception. But when the apostle 
 adds — " being justified freely by his grace," the 
 absolute universality ceases ; else it would follow that 
 all men are actually justified. There is an obvious 
 transition from the universality of fact to the univer- 
 sality of design. The fact is that " all have sinned ;" 
 but the corresponding fact is, not that all are justi- 
 fied, but that to all the ground of justification is the 
 same; so that all who are justified are justified on 
 that ground. The one is a universality without ex- 
 ception ; the other a universality without difference. 
 " The righteousness of God which is by faith of Je- 
 
295 
 
 sus Christ" is accordingly represented in the pre- 
 ceding verse as " unto all," (that is, in the Gospel 
 proclamation and offer) and as " upon all them that 
 believe" (that is, to their actual justification and 
 acceptance with God;) there being "no difference" 
 — no difference, as he elsewhere more fully expresses 
 it, " between the Jew and the Greek, the same Lord 
 over all being rich unto all that call upon him." 
 And here, accordingly, on the same principle, he 
 adds — " Is he the God of the Jews only ? Is he not 
 also of the Gentiles ? Yes, of the Gentiles also : — • 
 seeing it is one God, who shall justify the circum- 
 cision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith ;" 
 — Jew and Gentile in the same way ; — on the same 
 ground, and through the same medium ; — the one 
 and the other alike " by faith, without the deeds of 
 law.'' — As the meaning of this passage, then, evi- 
 dently is, that there is but one method of justifica- 
 tion, — that this method is equally adapted and equally 
 designed for Jews and Gentiles, — and that every one 
 who is justified is "justified freely by God's grace, 
 through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ;" — 
 so also is the meaning of the other — that Christ is 
 the true and only Light, — that this Light is equally 
 adapted and equally designed for Jews and Gentiles, 
 — and that every man who is enlightened — truly and 
 savingly enlightened — is enlightened from this one 
 Light. 
 
296 
 
 I hope you do not anticipate my dwelling upon 
 other passages. If you do, I must disappoint you. 
 I cannot bring myself to argue on the meaning of 
 words and phrases and statements, when that mean- 
 ing is so palpable that argument can only bewilder. 
 In such cases, there is nothing more troublesome 
 than to frame an argument ; and then, the very at- 
 tempt to frame it unavoidably leads the reader to 
 surmise the existence of difficulty where there is 
 none. — For example, Mr Barclay, after having stated, 
 amongst the points which may be " confidently af- 
 firmed and clearly evinced, according to the testimony 
 of the Holy Scripture? — " that God hath given to 
 " every man, whether Jew or Gentile, Turk or Scy- 
 «•' thian, Indian or Barbarian, of whatsoever nation, 
 " country, or place, a certain day or time of visita- 
 " tion ; during which day or time it is possible for 
 " them to be saved, and to partake of the fruit of 
 4 < Christ's death," — proceeds thus: — " Secondly, That 
 " for this end God hath communicated and given unto 
 " every man a measure of the light of his own Son, 
 " a measure of grace, or a measure of the Spirit, 
 " which the Scripture expresses by several names. 
 " as sometimes the seed of the kingdom, Math. xiii. 
 " 18, 19. the light that makes all things manifest, 
 " Eph. v. 13. the word of God, Rom. x. 17. or 
 " manifestation of the Spirit given to every man to 
 " profit withal, 1 Cor. xii. 7. a talent, Math. xxv. 15. 
 
297 
 
 " a little leaven, Math. xiii. 33. the gospel preached 
 " in every creature, Col. i. 23."* — Now I have already 
 adverted, at greater length than they were entitled 
 to, to the interpretations put upon one or two of 
 the passages where these expressions are used. But 
 you must dispense with my setting about a formal 
 proof, that the seed or word of the kingdom, the 
 light that makes all things manifest, the word of God, 
 the talent, the little leaven, in the places where they 
 respectively occur, do not represent the " inward 
 light." I should account this absolute trifling. The 
 simple reading of each of the passages ought to be 
 sufficient for the repudiation of a commentary so 
 outrageously arbitrary ; a commentary which can 
 find a sanction in your minds only from those asso- 
 ciations which custom has connected with a peculiar 
 phraseology, — a phraseology, it is to be feared, ori- 
 ginating in the exigencies of a mystical and extra- 
 vagant system, with which Scripture could not be 
 brought into the appearance of harmon}' otherwise 
 than by the perversion of its simplest language. You 
 may think this severe. It is so. But I cannot help 
 it. I do not pronounce the perversion wilful, in the 
 sense of giving a different meaning in the book from 
 that which, at the time, exists in the mind. What I 
 mean is, that, a principle being once adopted, and 
 
 * Apology, page 132. 
 
298 
 
 obtaining favour and fixture in the mind, there is a 
 natural and powerful tendency to interpret Scripture 
 according to it ; to find it in many a place, where 
 something else had always been found before; and, if 
 the principle should have aught in it of mysticism, 
 to attach its mystic import to many a term and many 
 a phrase, which had never before suggested any thing 
 but what was obvious and simple. It is thus that 
 the light, the seed, the grace, the word, the Christ, 
 the leaven, the talent, and various other terms, have 
 come to possess, in the lips and in the minds of 
 Friends, by the power of association, a meaning so 
 different from that which they bear in the common 
 vocabulary of Christians ; and the force of attach- 
 ment to the principle from which this peculiarity of 
 language arises, has many a time imparted to the 
 veriest conceits of criticism, and crudities of interpre- 
 tation, the aspect of ingenious originality and pro- 
 found wisdom. I have thought, and thought again, 
 on the passages above referred to, and others of a 
 similar character, and have come to the deliberate 
 conviction that the best way to dispose of them is, 
 to leave them to your own judgment. Read them ; 
 read them carefully and candidly ; read them with- 
 out either Barclay's spectacles or mine ; read them 
 only with minds divested of prepossession and preju- 
 dice, and simply desiring an answer to the question 
 What is truth ? — and I am persuaded that you will 
 
299 
 
 find no difficulty. Instead of the imcard light, in 
 any of its visionary and varying aspects, you will 
 discover in them what is definite, substantial, and 
 ever the same, — " the gospel of Jesus Christ," — the 
 word preached by Himself and his apostles, — the 
 word heard by men of all characters and all condi- 
 tions, — -the various treatment experienced by it, — 
 the various effects, in different characters, produced 
 by it, — its gradual diffusion from a small and limited 
 commencement, — its divine adaptation to the exi- 
 gencies of all mankind, — the welcome which it holds 
 out to all to receive its blessings, — its complete and 
 permanent establishment, and final results. 
 
 I must draw this letter to a close b}^ remarking, 
 what appears to be too obvious to need remark, but 
 what, notwithstanding, has marvellously escaped the 
 discernment of Barclay, — the distinction between the 
 object of faith and faith itself, Barclay writes as if 
 he held that faith itself cannot be internal, unless the 
 object of it be internal. He charges all who believe 
 in an external Christ, as " confiding in an external 
 barren faith ;" and, in the plenitude of his charity, 
 vilifies the Calvinists as desiring to have " a Christ 
 " to save them without any trouble, to destroy all 
 " their enemies for them without them, and nothing" 
 " or little within, and in the meanwhile to be at ease 
 " to live in their sins secure !" — and he imputes the 
 rejection of his " inward light" to the same cause 
 
300 
 
 with that to which Christ authoritatively ascribes 
 the rejection of himself and of the light of his doc- 
 trine : — "When all is well examined," says he, " the 
 " cause is plain ; it is because their deeds are evil, 
 " that with one consent they reject this light." — It 
 must surely, however, be manifest to you, that an 
 external faith is a contradiction in terms. Christ 
 may be outward ; the cross of Christ outward ; but 
 faith in Christ, faith in the cross of Christ, can be 
 nowhere else than in the mind and heart. And be- 
 cause my faith regards an object that is extraneous 
 to my own mind, it does not follow that it must be 
 " barren," any more than that it is external. So far 
 from its giving us ease in sin, and security amidst 
 unsubdued enemies and lusts, it is the inward prin- 
 ciple of an inward salvation, — a salvation from cor- 
 rupt affections and desires, and from the love of this 
 present world : — it is the victory by which the world 
 is overcome; — it purifies the heart; it works by love, 
 — by love to God, love to Christ, love to Christians, 
 love to mankind. He who fancies he has the faith 
 of the gospel, while his professed faith is not thus 
 operative, " deceiveth himself, and the truth is not in 
 him." The faith which we profess is, from the nature 
 of its object, eminently fitted to produce such effects. 
 It is the faith of the love of God who " spared not 
 his own Son but freely gave him up for us all :" — it 
 is the faith of " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 
301 
 
 who, though he was rich, for our sakes became poor, 
 that we, through his poverty, might be made rich :" 
 - — it is the faith of " the record, that God hath given 
 to us eternal life, and that this life is in his Son." 
 Believing this, we feel the full force of the appeals, 
 addressed to the gratitude of the renewed heart — " I 
 beseech you, therefore, brethren, by the mercies of 
 God, that ye present your persons a living sacrifice, 
 holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable 
 service:" — -"Ye are not your own; for ye are bought 
 with a price : therefore glorify God, in your body 
 and in your spirit, which are God's :" — " the love of 
 Christ constraineth us, because we thus judge, that 
 if one died for all, then were all dead ; — and that he 
 died for all, that they who live should not henceforth 
 live unto themselves, but unto Him who died for 
 them, and rose again." — But according to Barclay, 
 not only is faith itself in us, but the object of it is in 
 us ; — and in us not merely after we have believed, — 
 in the sense formerly adverted to, of its " dwelling 
 in our hearts by faith" the object of principles and 
 affections that are in us, — but in us previously to our 
 believing, — in all men, whether they believe or not. 
 The Christ on whom sinners are, by the gospel, called 
 to believe, is, according to him, a Christ already in 
 them. This is the doctrine in the promulgation of 
 which in his own day he glories, as the grand pecu- 
 liarity of Quakerism, and the only saving truth. 
 2c 
 
302 
 
 " From a sense of the blindness and ignorance that 
 ci have come over Christendom it is, that we are led 
 " and moved of the Lord" (such is his confident 
 language) " so constantly and frequently to call all, 
 " invite all, request all, to turn to the light in them, 
 " to mind the light in them, to believe in Christ as 
 " he is in them : and that in the name, power and 
 ' ' authority of the Lord, 1 ' — (is it an apostle that speaks ? ) 
 " — not in school-arguments and distinctions, we do 
 " charge and command them to lay aside their wis- 
 " dom, to come down out of that proud, airy, brain- 
 " knowledge, and to stop that mouth, how eloquent 
 " soever to the worldly ear it may appear, and to be 
 " silent, and sit down as in the dust, and to mind 
 " the light of Christ in their own consciences," — &c. 
 &c. — And was it, then, " proud, airy, brain-know- 
 ledge" which Paul had, when he said, " Yea, doubt- 
 " less, and I count all things but loss for the excel- 
 " lency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord : 
 " for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and 
 " do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 
 " and be found in him, not having mine own right- 
 " eousness which is of the law, but that which is by 
 " the faith of Christ, even the righteousness which is 
 " of God by faith ?"— Who was " Christ Jesus his 
 Lord," the knowledge of whom he thus prized as 
 above all price ? Was it not the " Jesus of Nazareth 
 whom he had persecuted ?" — was it not the Jesus to 
 
303 
 
 whom the martyred Stephen, — when " Saul consented 
 unto his death," " gave his voice against him, and 
 kept the raiment of them that slew him," — had borne 
 his testimonv as " standing at the right hand of 
 God ?" — For whom was it that he u suffered the loss 
 of all things ?" Was it not for that Jesus who had 
 said M I will show him how many things he must 
 suffer for my name's sake?" — Who was the Christ, 
 in whose righteousness he desired to be found? — 
 Was it not He who, at the time predicted by the 
 prophet, appeared on earth, " to finish the transgres- 
 sion, and to make an end of offerings for sin, and to 
 make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in 
 everlasting righteousness," — whose prophetic desig- 
 nation was " Jehovah our righteousness," — and whom 
 " God made sin for us, though he knew no sin. that 
 we might be made the righteousness of God in him?" 
 — And was not this the Jesus — this the Christ — this 
 the Saviour — this the Lord whom he preached to 
 others ? — preached, not with a " proud, airy, brain- 
 knowledge," but with a knowledge that made him 
 feel himself " less than the least of all saints ?" — 
 preached, " not with wisdom of words," not with 
 the artificial rhetoric of Greek or Roman schools, 
 yet with all the eloquence of lips that were touched 
 with the fire of God's altar ? Would Mr Barclay 
 have " stopped that mouth ?" And yet it was to an 
 outward Christ it bore its testimony ; — even to that 
 2 c 2 
 
304 
 
 Christ who was " made of a woman, made under the 
 law," who died on Calvary, and who lives, and 
 pleads, and reigns in heaven. Point me to one text 
 in which this apostle directs unbelieving sinners to 
 an inward Christ, — in which he speaks of Christ as 
 being in any except believers. There is no such 
 text. This apostle, like all the rest, delivered his 
 testimony, presented the evidences of its truth, and 
 called on sinners to believe it : — and when it was 
 believed, then Christ was " in those who believed it 
 the hope of glory :" — he u dwelt in their hearts by 
 faith :" they trusted in him, they loved him, they fol- 
 lowed him: having "received Christ Jesus the Lord, 
 they walked in hiin." 
 
 " Glory to God for ever !" exults this extraordi- 
 nary man, in terms worthy of a better cause, " who 
 " hath chosen us as first-fruits to himself in this day, 
 " wherein he is arisen to plead with the nations, and 
 " therefore hath sent us forth to preach this everlast- 
 " ing Gospel unto all, Christ nigh to all, the light in 
 " all, the seed sown in the hearts of all, that men 
 " may come and apply their minds to it. And we 
 " rejoice that we have been made to lay down our 
 " wisdom and learning (such of us as have had some 
 " of it) and our carnal reasoning, to learn of Jesus ; 
 " and sit down at the feet of Jesus in our hearts, and 
 " hear him, who there makes all things manifest, and 
 
305 
 
 " reproves all things by his light, Eph. v. 13."* — 
 Where is there any thing akin to this in the writ- 
 ings of the apostles ? Where, in these writings, are 
 sinners called upon to come and learn " the everlast- 
 ing gospel" by "applying their minds" to alight 
 already in them ? Where are they taught to " sit 
 down at the feet of a Jesus in their hearts" and thus 
 to receive saving instruction, not from God's word, 
 but from within themselves ? What is this Christ 
 within — this light within — this seed within — which 
 " reproves all things, and makes all things manifest ?" 
 What is the amount of knowledge, which, yourselves 
 being judges, when the " swelling words" used in 
 its eulogy are set aside, is actually derived from this 
 " inward light" — this Jesus in the heart— -this divine 
 teacher, that preaches in every creature ? — What 
 does it teach — what does it preach ? In the terms 
 of your own committee, in their dealings with the 
 author of the Beacon, it is " the light by which the 
 law of God is in measure made known to all ?ne?i."f 
 — This is all. Barclay makes no more of it than 
 your committee does. Their language accords with 
 that of all your accredited writers. This is what 
 Barclay makes of the " grain of mustard-seed," 
 Math. xiii. 31, 32. which, says he, " though it be 
 
 * Apology, page 179. 
 
 f Correspondence between the Committee of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Friends, and Isaac Crewdson, &c. page 27. 
 
 2 c 3 
 
306 
 
 " small in its appearance, and that it be hid in the 
 " earthly part of man's heart ; yet therein is life and 
 " salvation towards the sons of men wrapped up, 
 " which comes to be revealed as they give way to 
 "it." And, in terms as extraordinary as any in his 
 book (and that is saying not a little) he proceeds 
 thus to set forth the wonders of this " least of all 
 seeds :" — " And in this seed, in the hearts of all 
 " men, is the kingdom of God, as in capacity to be 
 " produced, or rather exhibited according as it receives 
 " depth, is nourished, and not choked. Hence Christ 
 " saith, that the kingdom of God was in the very Pha- 
 " risees, Luke xvii. 20, 21. who did oppose and resist 
 " him, and were justly accounted as ' serpents, and a 
 " generation of vipers/ Now the kingdom of God 
 " could be no otherways in them than in a seed, even 
 " as the thirty-fold and the hundred-fold is wrapt up 
 " in a small seed, lying in a barren ground, which 
 " springs not forth because it wants nourishment ; 
 " and as the whole body of a great tree is wrapt up 
 " potentially in the seed of the tree, and so is brought 
 " forth in due season ; and as the capacity of a man 
 " or woman is not only in a child, but even in the 
 " very embryo; even so the kingdom of Jesus Christ, 
 " yea Jesus Christ himself, Christ within who is the 
 " hope of glory, and becometh wisdom, righteous- 
 " ness, sanctification, and redemption, is in every 
 " man's and woman's heart, in that little incorrupti- 
 
307 
 
 " ble seed, ready to be brought forth as it is cher- 
 " ished and received in the love of it. For there 
 " can be no men worse than those rebellious and 
 " unbelieving Pharisees were ; and yet this kingdom 
 " was thus within them, and they were directed to 
 " look for it there ; so, it is neither ? lo here ' nor * lo 
 " there,' in this or the other observation, that this is 
 " known, but as this seed of God in the heart is 
 " minded and entertained."* 
 
 I have called this a wonderful little seed. Is it not 
 so ? It is that " by which the law of God is in 
 measure made known unto all men ;" — that is, from 
 which those who are destitute of divine revelation 
 derive the little knowledge they manifest of the dif- 
 ference between right and wrong, between good and 
 evil. And yet in this little seed, this least of all 
 seeds, there lie, potentially enfolded, all the myster- 
 ies of the kingdom of God ; the everlasting Gospel 
 in all its truths and blessings; wisdom, righteousness, 
 sanctification, and redemption; Jesus Christ himself, 
 and the hope of glory ! — so that the most ignorant 
 heathen, and the very worst of human beings, has 
 only to " mind and entertain this seed of God in his 
 heart" — has only to attend to this light in his own 
 mind — has only to " sit down at the feet of this 
 Christ within him," — and all is his : — if he only 
 
 * Apol. pages 176, 177. 
 
308 
 
 • ; cherishes" this little seed, " hid in the earthly part 
 of his heart," it will germinate, and unfold itself to 
 all the fulness of evangelical knowledge, holiness, 
 and blessing ! All the mysteries of the gospel king- 
 dom are wrapped up in this sense of right and 
 wrong, — this measure of the knowledge of God's 
 law ! — Now, do you believe this ? can you believe 
 this ? To me it appears as strange a mystery in the 
 world of mind, as the doctrine of transubstantiation 
 in the world of matter. Granting that, in nature, the 
 seed contains in its germ the miniature of the future 
 tree, — and that whatever is subsequently evolved was 
 thus previously in the seed, — yet surely no seed can 
 ever evolve that which it does not contain. How, then, 
 can there ever be unfolded, from a seed that contains 
 no more than " a measure of the knowledge of God's 
 law," all the discoveries and all the effects of the 
 Gospel? May you not as reasonably believe the 
 body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ to be 
 contained in the consecrated wafer? 
 
 When Jesus says to the Pharisees, who asked him 
 "when the kingdom of God should come" — "be- 
 hold the kingdom of God is within you ;" the con- 
 text shows that his object is to set before them the 
 true nature of that kingdom, as a spiritual kingdom ; 
 — a kingdom, not such as they, in common with 
 their countrymen in general, were expecting, but 
 one which had to do with human hearts, — subduing 
 
309 
 
 them to God, bringing them into willing and holr 
 subjection ; — a kingdom, of which the principles, and 
 influences, and blessings, were specially internal. In 
 the words used by him, therefore, he is not to be 
 understood as stating a fact respecting the Pharisees, 
 but as stating a fact respecting his kingdom. He tells 
 them, that, while they were looking for something 
 outward, — something " coming with observation," — 
 that is, with external power and show, — they were 
 looking for that which they should never find ; that 
 all who found his kingdom should find it within them ; 
 that if they themselves found it, it must be there, — in 
 the power of its gracious principles in their hearts. — ■ 
 I have no wish to rid myself of any difficulty by ren- 
 dering the words as some do, " behold the kingdom 
 of God is among you/' I hold by our authorized 
 version as the true one. But nothing can be more 
 extravagant, than either to identify, as Barclay does, 
 the sense of right and wrong possessed by the hea- 
 then, (howsoever communicated) with the discover- 
 ies and principles of the New Testament kingdom, 
 as revealed by Christ and his apostles ; — or to insist 
 upon it that that kingdom, wrapt up in its embryo 
 seed, was actually at the time in the hearts of those 
 who are elsewhere likened to " whited sepulchres, 
 beautiful outwardly, but within full of dead men's 
 bones and all uncleanness," — in hearts that were 
 
310 
 
 Ci full of hypocrisy and iniquity," of " extortion and 
 excess !" 
 
 The " seed," of which our Lord so frequently 
 makes figurative use, is " the word of the kingdom," 
 Math. xiii. 19. called in the parallel passage of 
 Luke's gospel, "the word of God," Luke viii. 11. 
 and, in the gospel by Mark, simply " the word," 
 Mark iv. 14. " The sower soweth the word." — This 
 seed was sown in the preaching of Christ himself, 
 and of his apostles and other ministers ; — and it is 
 still sown, in the preaching of all who publish the 
 same truths. It found of old, and it still finds, vari- 
 ous soils, and presents various results : — like seed, 
 in the natural world, either taking no root at all, as 
 on the trodden foot-path ; springing up with hasty 
 but feeble and inefficient growth, and scorched 
 immediately before the sun,— as on the thinly 
 covered rock; presenting a fairer promise, but 
 choked and rendered fruitless by the rankly-spring- 
 ing thorns ; or, in the good ground, growing up, 
 and bearing fruit, thirty, sixty, an hundred fold : — 
 the first case representing those from whose minds 
 "the wicked one" catches away the word, the in- 
 stant it has found admission ; — the second, those 
 whose inconsiderate profession, superficial and root- 
 less, gives way at the first approach of difficulty and 
 trial ; — the third, such as set out well, but become 
 the victims of " the cares of this life, the deceitfulness 
 
311 
 
 of riches, and the lusts of other things ;" — and the 
 fourth the genuine subjects of the kingdom, in whose 
 " good and honest hearts," rendered such by the in- 
 fluence of the Divine Spirit, the word is retained, 
 and fruit is brought forth with patience. — All this is 
 simple and intelligible. The mystic little " seed," 
 which exists, independently of the written or preach- 
 ed word, " in every man's and woman's heart," and 
 which requires only to be " cherished," — though 
 with what kind of culture it is not easy to tell, — in 
 order to bring out of it all the fulness of the Gos- 
 pel, — is as far as possible from being so : — and I 
 know not any one thing that has given occasion to a 
 larger amount of the misappropriation and perversion 
 of Scripture terms and Scripture figures, than this 
 " seed,"— this "light" — this " Christ within;" — nor 
 can I refer you to a more satisfactory exemplification 
 of the truth of this, than to Barclay himself. 
 
 In my next and last letter, I mean to consider the 
 sentiments of Mr Gurney on " the perceptible influ- 
 ence and guidance of the Spirit of Truth," along 
 with some of their practical bearings. 
 Meantime, believe me again, 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 R. W. 
 
LETTER VIII. 
 
 « ON THE PERCEPTIBLE INFLUENCE AND GUIDANCE 
 OF THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH." 
 
 Respected Friends, 
 
 " The yearly committee," in their state- 
 ment of objections to the Beacon, declare their con- 
 viction, which I may presume, therefore, to be that 
 of the Quaker body generally, that " the doctrine of 
 the inward light is absolutely identical with the 
 doctrine of the Spirit." — I was glad to find, from this 
 authorized statement, that I had not gone too far, in 
 the outset of these letters, when I pronounced the 
 " inward light" to be the very vital principle of 
 Quakerism ; and it has been under this conviction, 
 that I have allotted to it so large a proportion of my 
 strictures. At the same time, although the denial of 
 the " inward light" might fairly be regarded as a 
 denial of the doctrine of the Spirit in the sense in 
 which that doctrine is held by Friends ; yet there are 
 different departments of the same doctrine, and dif- 
 ferent views under which it may be contemplated and 
 discussed. All mankind, according to the Friends, 
 
313 
 
 have "a portion of the light of the Spirit of Christ;" 
 and they have this, as the result of Christ's media- 
 tion. Now, it may be one question, how far this 
 universal possession of the Spirit is capable of being 
 maintained; and another question, how far, when the 
 Spirit is possessed, his guidance and influence are 
 direct and perceptible. The latter position, indeed, 
 would appear hardly to admit of question, in those 
 cases where there exists no external revelation, as the 
 rule by which, when it is enjoyed, the Spirit may be 
 supposed to impart his directions : — for, the light of 
 nature, as usually understood, being by the Friends 
 denied, — unless the influence and guidance of the 
 Spirit, in the measure in which it is possessed, were 
 direct and perceptible, it would, in such cases, amount 
 to absolutely nothing. But the question still re- 
 mains, how far the influence and guidance of the 
 Spirit are direct and perceptible, in the case of those 
 who are in actual possession of the written word ; — 
 that is, as a little explanation will show, how far they 
 are independent of that word, — It is to Mr Gurney's 
 views on this question, with some of its practical 
 bearings, that I now solicit your attention : and in 
 discussing these, I take for my text-book the " Ob- 
 servations" of that esteemed author, of which the 
 third chapter is exclusively appropriated to this sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Having already considered, at great length, the 
 2 D 
 
314 
 
 doctrine of the Friends respecting " immediate reve- 
 lation, '" — and having, on one occasion, alluded to the 
 title of this letter, — (which is the same as the title of 
 the chapter in Mr Gurney's work just referred to) — 
 as only a modified form of designation for the same 
 doctrine, I may seem to you as if I were about to 
 retrace the ground I have already traversed. And 
 so, to a certain extent, I am. I hinted, however, the 
 possibility, when discussing Barclay's representations 
 of this Quaker principle, that I might bring them 
 into comparison with those of Mr Gurney. I now 
 follow out this hint ; not, indeed, for the purpose of 
 tracing, directly, either a parallelism or a contrast 
 between the one and the other ; but for the sake of 
 showing that even Mr Gurney's modified statements 
 are such as cannot be maintained in consistency 
 either with the Scriptures or with themselves ; — and 
 still more, for the sake of presenting what appears 
 to me to be the truth on this fundamental point in a 
 clearer and more direct light than has yet, in these 
 letters, been done, as well as of pointing out the 
 pernicious tendency of the doctrine of " perceptible 
 guidance" in some of its more obvious and avowed 
 practical results. I foresee a little repetition here 
 and there of sentiments already advanced in a dif- 
 ferent form, which connexion may render unavoid- 
 able, and which must find its vindication in the para- 
 mount importance of the subject, — a subject which 
 
315 
 
 may fairly be regarded as the hinge on which the 
 whole system of Quakerism turns ; this " perceptible 
 influence and guidance of the Spirit of truth" being 
 not only pleaded for as the direct and ever-present 
 rule of personal conduct, but appealed to in support 
 of some modes of divine worship and in opposition 
 to others, and invested with judicial authority in de- 
 ciding controversies respecting Christian ordinances, 
 — controversies which, in the apprehension of Chris- 
 tians generally, can receive no satisfactory settlement 
 but in an answer to the question " What saith the 
 Scripture ?" 
 
 In introducing this subject to the attention of his 
 readers, Mr Gurney, in accordance with what has 
 just been said, speaks of it as " an important doc- 
 " trine of religion, which, although by no means 
 " peculiar to Friends, is certainly promulgated among 
 u them with remarkable earnestness, and which lies 
 " at the root of all their particular views and prac- 
 tices."* 
 
 " The differences of sentiment which exist in the 
 " church on this great subject," he continues, " have 
 " respect, not to the question whether the Spirit does 
 " or does not operate on the heart of man (for on this 
 " question all true Christians are agreed;) butprinci- 
 " pally, if not entirely, to the mode in which that Spirit 
 
 * Observations, &c. page 74. close of Chap. 2. 
 2d 2 
 
316 
 
 Ci operates." — And he then proceeds to state the 
 amount of the difference between other Christians 
 and those of his own communion, in the following 
 terms : — " On this point there appears to exist, 
 " among the professors of Christianity, and even 
 " among serious Christians, a considerable diversity 
 " of opinion. Some persons conceive that the Spirit 
 " of God does not influence the heart of man directly, 
 " but only through the means of certain appointed 
 " instruments; such as, the Holy Scriptures, and the 
 " word preached. Many others, who allow the di- 
 " rect and independent influences of the Spirit, and 
 " deem them absolutely essential to the formation of 
 " the Christian character, refuse to admit that they 
 " are perceptible to the mind ; but consider them to 
 " be hidden in their actions, and revealed only in 
 " their fruits. Now with Friends (and probably with 
 " many persons under other names) it is a leading 
 '• principle in religion, that the work of the Holy 
 " Spirit in the soul is not only immediate and direct, 
 " but perceptible. We believe, that we are all fur- 
 " nished with an inward Guide or Monitor 9 ivho 
 " makes his voice known to us, and who, if faithfully 
 " obeyed and closely followed, will infallibly conduct 
 " us into true virtue and happiness, because he leads 
 " us into a real conformity with the will of God" 
 
 * Ibid, pages 75, 76. 
 
 
317 
 
 I have marked this last sentence in Italics, because 
 I am desirous that the statement contained in it 
 should be specially noted. It is Mr Gurney's expla- 
 nation of what he wishes to be understood as mean- 
 ing by the " perceptible influence and guidance of 
 the Spirit of Truth." — Let it be observed, then — 
 
 In the first place, that such a statement goes far 
 to a setting aside of the Scriptures as the Christian's 
 rule and guide, or at least of the necessity of their 
 counsel and direction. It seems as if it brought 
 against the divine word a charge of felo de se, — 
 adducing it in evidence of its authoritatively setting 
 aside itself. Regarding the sentence as expressing 
 the amount of the privilege of " perceptible influence 
 and guidance" conceived by Mr Gurney to be enjoyed 
 by New Testament believers, I take it in connexion 
 with what he says, page 89. " That the perceptible 
 " influence of the Spirit on the soul proceeds from 
 " God, the Christian enjoys satisfactory evidence — 
 "first, in the declarations of Scripture that such an 
 " influence shall be bestowed upon him — and second- 
 " ly, in the practical results into which it leads." — Of 
 the latter branch of evidence I may speak again. It 
 is to the former I at present refer. According to Mr 
 Gurney, then, the Scriptures assure believers, that they 
 are " all furnished with an inward Guide or Moni- 
 " tor, who makes his voice known to them, and who, 
 u if faithfully obeyed and closely followed, will infal- 
 2 d 3 
 
318 
 
 " libly conduct them into true virtue and happiness, 
 " because he leads them into a real conformity with 
 " the will of God." — Now, my question is, am I to 
 understand this as meaning that the Scriptures, on 
 the part of their Divine Author, promise a guidance 
 that is independent of themselves ? Is it thus inde- 
 pendent, or is it not ? If it be, then to what purpose 
 the multiplied directions and admonitions of that 
 blessed Book, as to principles, affections, desires, ac- 
 tions, and words ? Why lay down so many laws, 
 and urge an unceasing remembrance of them and 
 attention to their prescriptions and prohibitions, and 
 at the same time assure us of an inward guide by 
 which laws are rendered needless, — a guide "infallibly 
 conducting into virtue and happiness" all by whom 
 it is " faithfully obeyed and closely followed ?" — 
 When Mr Gurney says of this Guide — " he leads us 
 into a real conformity with the will of God," — either 
 he means the will of God abstractly, that is, simply 
 as existing in the divine mind, — or he means the 
 will of God as contained in the Scriptures. If he 
 means the former, then the consequence just stated 
 clearly follows ; that, namely, of the Scriptures, ac- 
 cording to him, disowning their own necessity to the 
 guidance of God's people. If he means the latter, 
 then the Scriptures, after all, are the rule — the fun- 
 damental and primary rule; for such a rule that 
 must assuredly be, into conformity with which it is the 
 
319 
 
 design and effect of the Spirit's agency to bring us. 
 That which brings us into this conformity can never 
 itself be the rule or canon. — A friend (let me sup- 
 pose) who is familiarly and correctly versant in the 
 law of the land, undertakes to be my director; and 
 I surrender myself implicitly to his guidance, having 
 a perfect confidence that he will, in no point, lead me 
 astray. This friend does not, in these circumstances, 
 become himself the primary rule. It is the Law that 
 still holds this place, into conformity with which his 
 directions bring me. It is not difficult, however, to 
 perceive, that, in proportion to the measure of impli- 
 cit faith with which I give myself up to the counsels 
 of such a guide, will become my indifference about 
 investigating the law, and obtaining an acquaintance 
 with it, for myself. The same must be the tendency 
 of the sentiment in regard to the study of the Holy 
 Scriptures. If the Spirit dwelling in us is an inde- 
 pendent Guide, we have but slender inducements to 
 study with assiduity a rule, of which, with the higher 
 and more immediate direction of an infallible Mo- 
 nitor within, we cease to feel the necessity.- — It is 
 for the excellent author on whose w r ords I am com- 
 menting, to consider, how far the view he thus gives 
 of the Spirit's " perceptible guidance" is in harmony 
 with the sentiments he elsewhere expresses respecting 
 the paramount authority of the Holy Scriptures. 
 Secondly: The " perceptible influence'' of the 
 
320 
 
 Spirit is not illustrated by Mr Gurney as relating to 
 the discovery of truth, but exclusively, or almost ex- 
 clusively, as relating to the direction of the life. 
 Hence, when the Spirit — the Spirit of Christ of 
 which " a measure is bestowed upon all mankind" — 
 is spoken of as " Light," and as " making manifest," 
 — what is it, according to Mr Gurney, that it does 
 make manifest? " Since, then, the Spirit of Christ, 
 " appearing in the soul of man, is light, it is plain 
 " that this Spirit makes manifest — communicates an 
 " actual moral sense — teaches what is right and what 
 " is wrong, in a perceptible or intelligible manner." 
 — The illustration of this general position imme- 
 diately subjoined shows that this is the kind of guid- 
 ance which he considers the indwelling Monitor as 
 affording especially to the children of God: — " Thus 
 " the psalmist prayed as follows : ' O send out thy 
 " light and thy truth ; let them lead me ; let them 
 " bring me unto thy holy hill and to thy tabernacles." 
 " The light and the truth for which he thus offered up 
 " his petitions, could not be the written law, of which 
 " he was already in possession — the expressions are 
 " rather to be understood of the light of God's coun- 
 " tenance and the truth revealed by his Spirit : and 
 " these, according to the views of the psalmist, were 
 '• at once perceptible and powerful ; for they were 
 i; to lead him in the way of righteousness, and to 
 
321 
 
 " bring him to the holy hill and tabernacles of God."* 
 — I shall not inquire, whether David, when he prays 
 for the " sending forth of God's light and truth," had 
 reference to that immediate divine inspiration, of 
 which, amongst those " holy men of God who spoke 
 as they were moved by the Holy Spirit/' his psalms 
 show him to have been so eminent a partaker : — nor 
 whether there was any allusion to those supernatural 
 ways in which the divine mind was then, not unfre- 
 quently, indicated, and to which David, we know? 
 on various occasions, had recourse ; such, for ex- 
 ample, as the Urim and Thummim. — Setting these 
 apart, I have only to ask, ought not the language of 
 David on one occasion to be taken in connexion with 
 his language on other occasions, and each to be in- 
 terpreted in consistency with the other? Now to 
 any who are familiar with the divine compositions of 
 the " sweet singer of Israel," I need not say, with 
 what frequency he speaks of God's word, under a 
 variety of appropriate designations, as the chosen and 
 constant rule of his conduct, and guide of bis life : 
 " Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might 
 not sin against thee :" — " Thy testimonies also are 
 my delight, and my counsellors :" — " Thy word is a 
 lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path :"' — 
 " The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: 
 
 * Observations, &c. page 77. 
 
322 
 
 the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the 
 simple : the statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing 
 the heart : the commandment of the Lord is pure, 
 enlightening the eyes : the fear of the Lord is clean, 
 enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are 
 true, and righteous altogether. Moreover, by them 
 is thy servant warned ; and in keeping of them there 
 is great reward." * — When we find the psalmist speak- 
 ing in such terms of the divine word, are we war- 
 ranted in considering him, when he prays for God's 
 light and truth to lead and guide him, as praying 
 for a guidance independent of that word? Ought we 
 not rather to interpret him consistently with himself, 
 and understand the prayer as comprehensive of both? 
 — as imploring such an illumination of his mind by 
 God's Spirit as should impart a clear apprehension 
 of God's truth, — an apprehension which might at 
 once cheer his heart and direct his steps ? And may 
 not the terms "thy ltght and thy truth," taken 
 distinctively yet unitedly, be designed to express the 
 very combination for which I contend ? 
 
 The explanation of the Spirit's " perceptible in- 
 fluence and guidance" as having a more immediate 
 reference to duty than to knowledge, accords with 
 the representation of the same matter given by Wil- 
 liam Penn, as quoted formerly, pages 116, 117. — 
 
 * Ps. cxix. 11, 24, 105; xix. 1— 11. 
 
323 
 
 Yet it does not appear that Mr Gurney intends his 
 language to be interpreted thus restrictively. For, 
 in common with other Friends, he applies to all Chris- 
 tians the promises, given by Christ to his apostles, 
 of the Spirit to " bring all things to their remem- 
 brance whatsoever he had said unto them," and to 
 " guide them into all truth." I marvel at this. I 
 do not marvel that common minds should satisfy 
 themselves with a vague and indiscriminate use of 
 terms; but I do marvel, that a mind of such per- 
 spicacity and candour as Mr Gurney's should not 
 better " discern things that differ." If the pas- 
 sages referred to really contain a promise to all be- 
 lievers equally with the apostles, does it not follow 
 that all believers have their knowledge of divine truth 
 in the same way in which the apostles had theirs? 
 — and not only in the same way, but to the same 
 extent, and in the same perfection ? — that they have 
 it directly from the Spirit, and independently of 
 written revelation ? — But I must not resume the dis- 
 cussion of texts which have already been under re- 
 view. See pages 85 — 93. — For the same reason, I 
 must refrain from dwelling on 1 John ii. 20, 27, on 
 which too Mr Gurney, like other Friends, lays much 
 stress ; — representing it as expressing the fulfilment, 
 in the experience of believers generally, of the pro- 
 mises to the twelve apostles just referred to. I would 
 appeal to MrGurneys candid judgment, — in addition 
 
324 
 
 to what has been already said upon the passage in 
 pages 63 — 66, — whether the "knowledge of all 
 things" which is connected with the " unction from 
 the Holy One" does not relate to the spiritual dis- 
 cernment of what had been communicated to them 
 by inspired men commissioned and accredited for 
 this work? Besides the evidence of this formerly 
 adduced, I would point him to verses 20 — 24 ; and 
 especially to the last of these verses — "Let that there- 
 fore abide in you which ye have heard from the be- 
 ginning : if that which ye have heard from the be- 
 ginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue 
 in the Son and in the Father." Their having "heard 
 it from the beginning" clearly refers to the delivery 
 of the message of the gospel to them by its inspired 
 ambassadors : compare chap. i. 1 — 5. Was not 
 " the anointing," then, which " abode in them," and 
 " taught them of all things, and was truth and no lie," 
 that unction of the Holy Spirit by which there was 
 imparted to their minds, with increasing clearness and 
 fulness, the spiritual discernment of the excellence, and 
 glory, and harmony, and divinity of all " those truths 
 which were most surely believed among them?" — I 
 readily grant that " they were not any longer to 
 " depend on the teaching of their fellow -creatures :'' 
 — but I deny that this can be understood as inclu- 
 sive of the apostles. I deny it for two reasons : — in 
 the first place, for one formerly assigned, that such 
 
325 
 
 an interpretation would be inconsistent with the very 
 act in which John was at the time engaged, — the act 
 of teaching them. If they " needed not that any man 
 should teach them" — in consequence of their hav- 
 ing the knowledge of " all things" directly from the 
 Spirit of God to themselves, — then why does he teach 
 them ? — And, secondly, for this additional reason, 
 that the teaching of the apostles was not human 
 teaching, but divine. John himself accordingly, in 
 the same Epistle (chap. iv. 6.) says, " We are of 
 God : — he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is 
 not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the 
 spirit of truth and the spirit of error." The evidence 
 of their " knowing God," then, was, not their hear- 
 ing themselves, — that is, hearing the Spirit in them- 
 selves, — but their hearing the apostles : — because, 
 Jesus having said of them — " He that heareth you 
 heareth me ; and he that heareth me heareth Him 
 that sent me," — hearing them was hearing Christ 
 and hearing the Father, — and depending on them 
 was not depending on " fellow-creatures," but on 
 God. — All this is in fine harmony with the language 
 of our Lord in his intercessory prayer — John xvii. 
 20. " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them 
 also who shall believe on me through their word!' 
 It will not be questioned, I presume, that this prayer 
 included all believers to the end of time. The tes- 
 timony of the apostles, though not now uttered by 
 2e 
 
326 
 
 their lips, is still on record in their writings ; and to 
 this hour it is "through their word" that sinners be- 
 lieve. " Their word" contains the divine informa- 
 tion, — the truth to be believed ; and " their word," 
 read in the record, or preached by the lips of others, 
 is the instrumental means of saving illumination and 
 conversion, — while the Holy Spirit is the efficient 
 agent in opening the understanding to see it in its 
 real excellence, and the heart to receive it in the 
 love of it. 
 
 Jesus says of his followers, using the favourite and 
 delightful image of the Shepherd and his Flock — 
 " My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and 
 they follow me :" — " and other sheep I have which 
 are not of this fold ; them also I must bring, and they 
 shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and 
 one shepherd." — On these expressions Mr Gurney 
 offers the following comment — " The disciples of 
 " Jesus, who were gathered to him during his short 
 " abode upon the earth, undoubtedly enjoyed the 
 " privilege of being instructed by his outward voice; 
 " but the voice of Christ which was afterwards to be 
 " heard by his sheep, who were not of the Jewish 
 " fold, and which is still heard by his faithful fol- 
 " lowers, whom he ' leads in the way of righteous- 
 " ness,' we may conclude to be the voice of his Spirit, 
 " — a voice inwardly communicated to the soul of 
 
327 
 
 " man."* — But why should we not " conclude" this 
 voice to be the voice of Christ in his word ? Is not 
 the true import of " hearing Christ's voice," obeying 
 Christ's word? We are not, surely, destitute of his 
 word, merely because we have lost his living voice. 
 In the word of inspired truth, his voice speaks to us, 
 and shall continue to speak, with divine authority, 
 till the end of time. All who believe and obey that 
 word " hear Christ's voice ;" hearing, to every per- 
 son acquainted with the phraseology of Scripture, 
 being familiarly synonymous with obeying. When 
 the " voice from the excellent glory," which pro- 
 nounced Jesus God's " beloved Son in whom He was 
 well-pleased," added the command " Hear Him," 
 the spirit of the command evidently was — Submit to 
 his divinely recognised authority ; believe his word, 
 and do his will. His word is in the Scriptures ; his 
 will is in the Scriptures. The dictates of his Spirit 
 are there. And to "hear him" is to believe as 
 truth what is there revealed, and to practise as duty 
 what is there commanded. 
 
 Thirdly : While Mr Gurney affirms, respecting 
 the "perceptible guidance of the Spirit" for which 
 he pleads, that " if faithfully obeyed and closely fol- 
 " lowed, it will infallibly conduct us into true virtue 
 " and happiness, leading us into a real conformity 
 
 * Observations, &c. pages 79, 80. 
 
 2e2 
 
328 
 
 " with the will of God,'> he at the same time admits 
 to so great an extent the liableness of its professed 
 possessors to illusion, as almost to annihilate its value 
 by the doubt which it brings upon the question of its 
 reality : " While it may be hoped," says he, " that 
 " the spiritually-minded Christian will readily admit 
 " the force of these scriptural evidences, and will 
 " cheerfully embrace that profitable truth which they 
 " so clearly unfold ; it is not to be forgotten that the 
 " human imagination is very active and delusive, and 
 " that persons who are superficial in religion, or who 
 " are not sufficiently watchful, may sometimes mis- 
 " take the unauthorized dictates of their own minds 
 " for the voice of a divine and unerring guide. That 
 " errors of this description have on many occasions 
 " occurred, must be freely allowed ; and that, under 
 " particular circumstances, they may probably con- 
 " tinue to occur, will not be denied by those who 
 " are sufficiently aware of the infirmity and deceit- 
 " fulness of the heart of man. It appears, therefore, 
 " on the one hand, that the inward illumination of 
 " the Spirit of God is mercifully bestowed on us as 
 " a perceptible guide to righteousness, and, on the 
 " other hand, that we are exceedingly liable to be 
 " led about by the dictates of our own imagination. 
 " Such a view of the subject naturally leads us to 
 " inquire, by what characteristics the voice of the 
 " Lord's Spirit and that of the human imagination, 
 
329 
 
 " in matters of religion, may be distinguished from 
 " each other."* — This is strong language. The hu- 
 man imagination is pronounced, with the emphasis 
 of Italics, " very active and delusive ;" and the terms 
 " sometimes," " many occasions," " exceedingly lia- 
 ble/' &c. rise above each other, as if the conscious- 
 ness of the risk of deception had magnified in the 
 mind of the writer as he proceeded. But the lan- 
 guage, though strong, is not too strong. There 
 are few things, if any, that involve more numerous 
 or more powerful tendencies to self-deception. — It 
 must be obvious, even to the least considerate, that 
 the present question relates not at all to the infalli- 
 bility of the guidance when really possessed ; for, 
 once admit the guidance to be that of the Spirit of 
 God, and to doubt its being infallible becomes im- 
 piety. To grant it divine, is to grant it unerring. 
 But I have formerly had occasion to expose the 
 strange oversight of Mr Barclay, in confounding two 
 things so palpably distinct as the truth of what God 
 reveals and the reality of the revelation — pages 101 
 — 107. That " the true and undoubted revelation 
 of God's Spirit is certain and infallible," is, as I have 
 there shown, (or rather, I should say, stated — for to 
 show it would be to demonstrate a truism) a propo- 
 sition of no relevancy in the present controversy. 
 
 * Observations, &c. page 82. 
 2e 3 
 
330 
 
 The sole question relates to the reality of the reve- 
 lation ; — and this, Mr Barclay admits, " may be 
 called in question." To assert the infallibility of the 
 revelation when possessed, is to assert what is nothing 
 to the purpose, so long as it is, at the same time, 
 granted, that those who profess to have it may be 
 mistaken. The observations then made are appli- 
 cable, in their full spirit and force, to the representa- 
 tions of Mr Gurney. Of what avail is it, to know 
 that the Guide himself is infallible, when there is so 
 much of fallibility as to the possession of his guid- 
 ance ? In the written word, we have the recorded 
 mind of the Spirit. A clear apprehension, and a 
 full and ready acquaintance with this word, it is the 
 duty of every Christian to seek ; and, while he en- 
 deavours to follow its dictates, to look for divine in- 
 fluence to preserve him from every perverting bias. 
 But perceptible guidance^ if it be any thing at all that 
 is peculiar to Quakerism, is guidance independent of 
 the word ; the terms being only a gentler and more 
 modified expression of what the old fathers of the 
 system were wont to claim, as the privilege of New- 
 Covenant believers, under the more unqualified title 
 of immediate revelation. The question, therefore, 
 comes to be, — if, in the subject himself of the sup- 
 posed influence, there exist so many tendencies to 
 self-deception, how is the reality to be determined ? 
 Mr Gurney answers this question, and endeavours 
 
331 
 
 to meet the difficulty which it involves, by a descrip- 
 tion of the two influences — the genuine and the 
 counterfeit — according to certain differential quali- 
 ties by which they are to be distinguished. He 
 first does this in general terms, and then more in 
 detail. " The least reflection," he observes, " may 
 " serve to convince us, that the two influences of 
 " which I have spoken, the true guide and the false 
 " guide, are in reality absolutely distinct, different, 
 " and sometimes even opposite. The true guide is 
 " -'the day-spring from on high,' and comes imme- 
 " diately from God, in whom there is no mixture of 
 " evil, and who is the original and unfailing source 
 " of all good. The false guide is the creature of 
 " human infirmity and misapprehension ; and fre- 
 " quently the source from which it arises is positively 
 " evil and corrupt. Those who are faithfully fol- 
 " lowing the true guide are the dedicated children 
 " of a holy God. Those who are following only the 
 " false guide, have constructed for themselves an 
 " unsound religion, and are mere enthusiasts. — As 
 " the voice of the true shepherd and the voice of the 
 " stranger are thus really distinct, and, in fact, op- 
 " posed to one another ; so, I believe, the sincere 
 " and humble Christian, who has been taught the 
 " lesson of waiting upon God, and whose religion is 
 " of no shallow character, will be enabled, by divine 
 " grace, to discern the one from the other. He will 
 
332 
 
 " find that they are clearly distinguished ; first, by 
 " the mode of their operation ; and secondly, by the 
 " fruits which they produce."* 
 
 Now, what is thus said about the difference of the 
 two influences may be all very true and very good. 
 But Mr Gurney himself must at once be sensible, that 
 the question is not about the difference of the influ- 
 ences themselves, but about the means of distinguish- 
 ing them ; and that to this question the latter part 
 alone of what has just been cited is at all relevant. 
 Before noticing, however, the two lines of distinc- 
 tion, here. stated and subsequently illustrated, it may 
 be remarked in general, that the very necessity of 
 specifying various tests, by which, independently of 
 the criterion of the written word, — the one guide is 
 to be discerned from the other, — and tests, too, of 
 which the correct application requires the experience 
 of one who has " learned the lesson of waiting upon 
 God," and " whose religion is of no shallow charac- 
 ter," — should of itself be sufficient to show the ques- 
 tionableness of the independent guidance contended 
 for, — and contended for, not merely as the special 
 attainment of advanced Christians, but as the com- 
 mon privilege, under the New Covenant, of all be- 
 lievers. It must not be forgotten, how many and 
 how strong are the admitted causes of self-delusion 
 
 * Observations, kc. pages S3, 84. 
 
333 
 
 which, singly or unitedly, serve to hinder the correct 
 application of the distinctive tests. — But let me no- 
 tice the tests themselves. 
 
 Fourthly: With regard to the first of the two, the 
 mode of operation, it does appear to me, I confess, to be 
 a very inadequate one. The illustration given of it is 
 beautiful ; but T cannot allow the mere gratification of 
 taste, or even the pleasing emotions of Christian feel- 
 ing, to prevent me from analysing the test itself, and 
 so to mislead me into an erroneous judgment. The 
 test is substantially (for, however willing to do so, I 
 cannot afford to quote by pages) — the difference be- 
 tween mental restlessness and mental stillness ; — the 
 violence, on the one hand, of the impulses of the 
 imagination, the confusion and disquietude of mind 
 in which they " lay hold of us," indicating sufficiently 
 the predominance of self, — and, on the other hand, 
 the quietness and gentleness of " the voice of Jesus 
 in the heart," the calm and humble subjection of 
 spirit to God in which the true guidance is obtained. 
 — This is precisely one of those cases, (of which, in 
 our present controversy, there are not a few,) which 
 have in them a certain amount of truth, but still, not 
 an amount sufficient for the purpose they are intro- 
 duced to serve. Is it so, that the human imagination 
 never operates deceitfully, excepting in seasons of 
 peculiarly fervid and turbulent excitement? "It may 
 " often," says MrGurney, " when applied to matters of 
 
334 
 
 u religion, be described as working in the whirlwind." 
 Granted. But does it never work except in the whirl- 
 wind ? Are there no illusory lights — no ignes fatui 
 — that ever mislead the contemplative and musing 
 mind ? Have no errors ever been found in systems 
 of quietism — no mystic hallucinations — no meditative 
 aberrations from truth ? Has it not, in experience, 
 been far otherwise ? And, Mr Gurney himself being 
 judge, — differing, widely differing, as he does, on 
 important principles, from the more ancient oracles 
 of your community, — may not Quakerism itself be 
 adduced as an exemplification of the untenableness 
 of his own position? It will never hold, that the 
 mere process of "getting still" is a thorough safe- 
 guard against the intrusion of heretical thoughts, or 
 even at times of the very wildest imaginations. A 
 prolific fancy may hatch whole broods of errors, in 
 all the calmness of contemplative incubation. — Has 
 there never been a degree of illusory confidence pro- 
 duced by the very stillness itself recommended as the 
 posture of mind for genuine divine communications? 
 Has no false assurance ever been engendered, re- 
 specting particular views, by this very consideration 
 — the assurance, that, because they were suggested 
 in the prescribed stillness, they must be divine ? — 
 There is taste and beauty in the allusion to the wind, 
 and the earthquake, and the fire, and the still small 
 voice, of Horeb : — and there is, what is far better, 
 
335 
 
 the depth and tenderness of piety in the application 
 of this allusion : — " When the pride of the heart is 
 " laid low, when the activity of human reasoning is 
 " quieted, when the soul is reduced to a state of 
 " silent subjection in the presence of its Creator, then 
 " is this ' still small voice* intelligibly heard, and the 
 i{ word of the Lord, as it is inwardly revealed to us, 
 " becomes ' a lamp unto our feet, and a light unto 
 " our paths.' " But there is a claim involved in these 
 words, of which, be it ever so humbly and devoutly 
 made, I cannot admit the validity. I must deny, 
 that it is " the word of the Lord, as inwardly re- 
 vealed to us" that is to be " the light of our feet, 
 and the lamp of our paths." This proceeds on the 
 assumption of immediate revelation, — the assumption, 
 that what is "inwardly revealed to us" possesses the 
 same authority with what was revealed to God's "holy 
 apostles and prophets by his Spirit :" — and, in order 
 to its possessing the same authority, it must have 
 the same certainty of its coming from God. Yet 
 Mr Gurney will not venture to affirm this ; and in 
 declining to affirm it, and admitting that the criterion 
 prescribed is neither universal nor sure, he seems to 
 me to surrender every thing in his " perceptible guid- 
 ance" that is really distinctive of Quakerism : — " If, 
 " however, there are persons (as I believe there are) 
 " of real piety, who desire to follow the guidance of 
 " their Lord and Master, and yet have not learned 
 
336 
 
 " to distinguish, as they would wish to do, the in- 
 " ternal manifestation of his Holy Spirit, let them 
 " not be unprofitably discouraged. Let them rather 
 " pursue their course in humble reliance on the mercy 
 " of God; and let them cultivate the animating hope 
 " that, as they are preserved in dedication to the 
 " divine will, and grow in grace, they will gradually 
 " become better acquainted with the word of the 
 " Lord within them, and will be comforted to a 
 " greater degree with the light of his countenance." 
 ■ — But in the meanwhile, what are they to do for a 
 " light to their feet and a lamp to their paths ?" Are 
 they to have none ? — or are they to have one that 
 only glimmers uncertainly, and leaves them in the 
 depression of despondency, or the irresolution of 
 doubt ? Would it not be far better, and far more 
 consistent, in Mr Gurney, — seeing '« the word of the 
 Lord within" is thus uncertain, and exposed to so 
 many occasions of hesitancy, to point all his fellow- 
 christians at once to the word without, and to recom- 
 mend the written record of accredited and ascer- 
 tained inspiration, as the true and only light, — 
 the sure guide to truth, to duty, and to happi- 
 ness? 
 
 Fifthly: With regard to the second of Mr Gurney's 
 two tests, it can hardly fail to strike every reader of his 
 work, how very near he approaches in it to the ordi- 
 
337 
 
 nary statements of evangelical Christians* — I am not 
 quite sure, indeed, whether I have a correct apprehen- 
 sion of Mr Gurney's classification of Christians ac- 
 cording to the views entertained by them on the sub- 
 ject of the Spirit's influence. He says, as already 
 quoted, — " Some persons conceive that the Spirit of 
 " God does not influence the heart of man directly, 
 " but only through the means of certain appointed 
 " instruments ; such as, the Holy Scriptures, and the 
 " word preached. Many others, who allow the di- 
 " rect and independent influences of the Spirit, and 
 " deem them absolutely essential to the formation of 
 " the Christian character, refuse to admit that they 
 " are perceptible to the mind ; but consider them to 
 " be hidden in their actions, and revealed only in 
 " their fruits." If by the former of these classes 
 Mr Gurney means those who identify the influence 
 of the Spirit with the influence of the word, and call 
 the latter by the designation of the former, merely 
 because the word has been given by the Spirit, — I 
 cannot regard such persons as maintaining the 
 doctrine of the Spirit's influence at all. They 
 maintain, indeed, the inspiration of the word; but 
 there, according to them, the agency of the Spirit 
 
 * I use the designation, of course, merely for distinction's 
 sake, — for there can be no Christian who is not evangelical, 
 unless a man can be a Christian without being a believer of the 
 gospel. 
 
 2 F 
 
338 
 
 terminates : inasmuch as, the word, though given 
 by the Spirit's inspiration, is not the Spirit him- 
 self; nor, consequently, the influence of the word 
 the influence of the Spirit himself. — But if he 
 means, that they who affirm the influence of the 
 Spirit to be exerted " through the means of certain 
 " appointed instruments, such as the Holy Scriptures 
 " and the word preached," — that is, more briefly, 
 that they who affirm the Spirit's influence to be by 
 the word, do by such affirmation deny it to be di- 
 rect, — I conceive him to be in a mistake. I refer 
 you to what has already been briefly said on this 
 point — pages 99 — 101. I cannot conceive of any 
 influence of the Spirit, at all deserving of the desig- 
 nation, that is not direct, — directly exerted, I mean, 
 upon the minds and hearts of men. To say, at the 
 same time, that it is by means of the word, is not at 
 all inconsistent, as already shown. The influence is 
 not upon the word, but upon the mind; but it is 
 upon the mind, when the word has been, or is at the 
 time, presented to it ; imparting, in a way which He 
 who promises the influence admonishes us not to ex- 
 pect clearly to understand, a spiritual discernment of 
 the divine excellence of what had previously ap- 
 peared foolishness, and so disposing to the cordial 
 and grateful acceptance of what had before been re- 
 jected with worldly-minded indifference, or with the 
 antipathy of offended pride. It is not, then, the di- 
 
339 
 
 rect influence of the Spirit that we question ; it is his 
 independent influence. It is an influence independent 
 of the word, — operating, that is, not upon the mind 
 with or by the word, but upon the mind apart from or 
 without the word. — Who the " many others" are, whom 
 Mr Gurney distinguishes from the "some" that 
 deny the direct influence of the Spirit, as "allowing 
 " his direct and independent influences, and deeming 
 " them absolutely essential to the formation of the 
 " Christian character," though they " refuse to ad- 
 " mit that they are perceptible to the mind,'' — I 
 confess myself at a loss to know. I am inclined to 
 think that, in this description, the terms " direct and 
 independent" have inadvertently been used as, in their 
 signification, nearly if not absolutely synonymous. 
 They are not so, however. That influence may be di- 
 rect which is not (in the sense already defined) inde- 
 pendent. And I am not, I repeat, at present aware, 
 of whom that numerous class of evangelical professors 
 consists, by which the influences of the Spirit, inde- 
 pendently of the written and preached word, are 
 " deemed absolutely essential to the formation of the 
 Christian character." The generally prevailing sen- 
 timent is assuredly different : — that, in conversion, 
 the truth is presented to the mind, in the written 
 word, or by the ministrations of God's servants ; and 
 that the Holy Spirit, operating by an influence upon 
 the understanding and heart, of which the mode is to 
 2 f 2 
 
340 
 
 us a secret, imparts such a conviction of the need of 
 salvation, and such a perception of the divine excel- 
 lence and suitableness of the salvation which the 
 gospel reveals, both in its nature and in its ground, 
 as induces the immediate, grateful, and joyful ac- 
 quiescence of the sinner in the proposed terms, — 
 his humble acceptance of the offered blessings as 
 " the gift of God through Jesus Christ our Lord," — 
 his penitential shame and sorrow for the past, — and 
 his sincere desire and determination to " live hence- 
 forward not unto himself, but unto him who died for 
 him and who rose again" — to "glorify God in his 
 body and in his spirit which are God's :" — and that, 
 in progressive sanctification, the Spirit is still the 
 Agent, working with divine efficiency; and the word, 
 whether read, or heard, or embodied in symbolical 
 ordinances, still the instrumental means. — The reality 
 of the change, and the progress of the new life in the 
 ioul, are evinced by corresponding fruits. And 
 here is the point to which I referred, when I said 
 that Mr Gurney's statements approach so very near 
 to those of evangelical Christians in general. The 
 second of his two tests, by which the genuine guid- 
 ance of the Spirit and the false guidance of the hu- 
 man imagination are to be distinguished, is — u the 
 fruits which they 'produce:' 1 — and by these fruits we 
 are to understand, not merely the inward effects ex- 
 perienced in the soul, but the outward effects on the 
 
341 
 
 conduct of the life. " Here,'' says Mr Gurney, re- 
 ferring to " the outward conduct of the man," — 
 " Here the difference between the fruits of two dis- 
 u tinct and even opposite principles, becomes com- 
 " pletely manifest." And he proceeds, in a way to 
 which few Christians will be disposed to object, to 
 point out the appropriate and distinctive indications 
 of the one and of the other. Now, wherein con- 
 sists the wide difference, between the sentiments of 
 those who, according to Mr Gurney, consider the 
 influences of the Holy Spirit to be " hidden in 
 their action, and revealed only in their fruits," — 
 and the view given by Mr Gurney himself, when 
 he represents those influences as " perceptible" in- 
 deed in their action, but, at the same time, the 
 minds that are conscious of them, as subject in 
 such a degree to various influences of an oppo- 
 site description, — the deceptive influences of a 
 carnal or an enthusiastic imagination, — as to bring 
 their reality into reasonable question, and to render 
 the application of certain practical tests necessary to 
 their authentication ?— To my mind, I confess, the 
 difference appears to be very minute, between an in- 
 fluence, imperceptible in its immediate action, but of 
 which the reality is manifested by its fruits, and an 
 influence, professedly perceptible in its action, but of 
 which the genuineness must be manifested by its 
 fruits. They are both influences, of which the fruits 
 2 f 3 
 
342 
 
 are admitted to be the only unequivocal evidence. — 
 u We may readily accede," says Mr Gurney, ' ; to 
 " the principle laid down by Locke, that we can en- 
 " tertain no reasonable confidence in any supposed 
 " spiritual illumination, farther than as we are fur- 
 " nished with evidence that it proceeds from God. 
 " Now, that the perceptible influence of the Spirit 
 " upon the soul proceeds from God, the Christian 
 u enjoys satisfactory evidence — first in the declara- 
 " tions of Scripture, that such an influence shall be 
 " bestowed upon him, — and secondly in the practi- 
 " cal results into which it leads. ' He that believeth 
 " on the Son of God hath the witness in himself.' 
 " He brings his own sensations to the test of expe- 
 " rience. He knows the tree by its fruits"* — Sure- 
 ly, if by the believer's " having the witness in him- 
 self," we are to understand his " bringing his sensa- 
 tions to the test of experience" — his " knowing the 
 tree by its fruits," — the difference between Mr Gur- 
 ney as a Quaker, and his fellow-christians of other 
 denominations, is as far as may be from being insur- 
 mountable. What the Quaker professes to be con- 
 scious of is the direct influence of the Spirit : — what 
 other Christians professes to be conscious of is the 
 direct influence of truth: — but the latter acknow- 
 ledge the Spirit's illumination as giving them rightly 
 
 * Observations, &c. page 89. 
 
343 
 
 to discern the truth, and the Spirit's subduing energy 
 as disposing them to obey it ; while the former ac- 
 knowledges that the influence of the Spirit, of which 
 he is conscious, must, if genuine, be according to 
 truth ; — and both the one consciousness and the 
 other are admitted to be susceptible of illusion, and 
 to require being tried by the criterion — the only un- 
 equivocal one — of their practical results. 
 
 I shall only add here, that when Mr Gurney 
 in support of the principle maintained by him, of the 
 direct intimations of the Spirit to the mind as " the 
 main rule in life" — makes his appeal, to examples 
 of individual friends, — he ought not to forget, how 
 large a host of similar examples of Christian excel- 
 lence can be mustered amongst those who profess to 
 take for their "main rule in life," the written word 
 of God, looking for the Spirit to incline them to fol- 
 low its dictates, and to " lead them," by means of it. 
 " in the way everlasting." — u Although discourage- 
 " ment may often overtake us, through the miscon- 
 * 6 duct of unsound brethren, my young friends, with 
 " myself, have enjoyed many opportunities of watch- 
 " ing the demeanour and conduct of experienced 
 " persons, who profess that obedience to the dictates 
 " of the Spirit of Truth, in the soul, is their main 
 " rule in life; and who, by a long course of patience 
 " and self-denial, have fully evinced the sincerity of 
 ** their profession. Now, we are certainly well 
 
344 
 
 " aware, and we need not fear to acknowledge, that 
 M the character and deportment of such persons are 
 u distinguished for sobriety and substantial excel- 
 " lence, and that, however various may be their 
 " situations, their talents, and their gifts, they resem- 
 " ble one another in this main characteristic — that 
 " they are fulfilling the law of love, and living a life of 
 " piety and usefulness."* — Now, mutatis mutandis — 
 or rather, I should say, mutato mutando, for there is 
 but a single alteration necessary — changing " the 
 dictates of the Spirit of Truth in the souV to "the 
 dictates of the Spirit of Truth in the word? — the 
 same thing may be truly affirmed of many, in every 
 evangelical body of Christian professors. But Mr 
 Gurney, I trust, will not deem me impertinent if I 
 put a question to him, respecting the excellent per- 
 sons to whose characters he thus appeals. I might 
 ask two, indeed. I might ask, whether these were 
 not persons who had been early trained under 
 the inculcated and exemplified influence of the law of 
 tc love" and of the principles of piety and usefulness : 
 — but the question which I am most solicitous to press, 
 referring for the answer to his own knowledge and 
 observation, is, whether they have not, in general 
 if not even invariably, been persons who have been 
 more than ordinarily conversant with the written 
 
 * Observations, Sec. pages 87, 88. 
 
345 
 
 word, the holy oracles of divine truth, — their minds 
 familiar with their precious contents, and their spirits 
 imbued with their peaceful and holy influence ; — and 
 how far, therefore, while they professed to follow the 
 immediate intimations of the Spirit, their exemplary 
 characters were not moulded, even more than they 
 might themselves be aware, and more than the support- 
 ers of their system might be willing to perceive, by that 
 very word to which they theoretically assigned an 
 inferior place and a subordinate influence; — whether, 
 in short, the secondary rule in theory, was not — - 
 however reluctant the Friends may be to grant it — 
 the primary rule in actual operation and guidance; 
 — and whether, while theoretically differing from their 
 fellow-christians, they were not, in a very great de- 
 gree, in point of fact, practically one with them. 
 
 6. In the observations with which Mr Gurney 
 closes his chapter on " perceptible influence and 
 guidance," — Christians of other denominations will 
 not differ from him or from one another. They 
 specify various " characteristics" of this guidance, — 
 " way-marks" of distinction between the path of the 
 Spirit of truth and that of the spirit of error. They 
 relate to tenderness, contrition, and lowliness of 
 heart ; — to the daily exercise of self-denial ; — to pro- 
 gress in the perceptions and sensibilities of con- 
 science ; — to correspondence between the law in the 
 Book and the law in the heart ; — and to exactness, 
 
346 
 
 comprehensiveness, unmixedness, of obedience to the 
 divine will. — Were some of the observations carried 
 out into practical detail, differences there would be ; 
 but in regard to the great marks of divine influence 
 laid down there can be none. That influence, ac- 
 cording to Mr Gurney's own summing up of its prac- 
 tical manifestations, " is ever found to lead to the 
 " humiliation of men, and to the exaltation of Christ; 
 " to the denial of self, and to the bearing of the cross ; 
 " to the increase of moral and spiritual light; to the 
 " confirmation and right application of the divine 
 " law, as it is recorded in the Holy Scriptures ; and 
 " to a very exact fulfilment of that law." * 
 
 I wish you, however, specially to observe, that, in 
 the illustration of one of these marks, Mr Gurney 
 appears to me to suggest the precise principle of inter- 
 pretation according to which all the passages relative 
 to the influence, the guidance, the witness of the 
 Spirit ought to be explained. I refer to Observation 
 fourth : — " Since the inward manifestations of divine 
 " light in the soul, if attended to, lead invariably into 
 " the practice of Christian graces; and since those 
 " graces are clearly described and enjoined in the 
 " Holy Scriptures, (especially in the New Testa- 
 " ment,) it is plain that these two practical guides to 
 " righteousness will ever be found in accordance with 
 
 * Observations, &c. page 96. 
 
347 
 
 M each other. The law written in the Book and the 
 " law written on the heart have proceeded from the 
 il same Author : the only standard of both of them 
 " is the will of God ; and therefore they can never 
 " fail to correspond.' ■ * — This is important truth ; and 
 it may, with all safety, be granted. that 5 whensoever 
 we find a correspondence between the heart and the 
 book, — a correspondence, of course, evinced by a 
 parallel correspondence between the heart and the 
 life, — there the Spirit of God has been at work. 
 These are effects, these are fruits, of his operation, 
 which can have no other origin, and which are of a 
 nature not to be mistaken. The question, however, 
 would still remain, whether the change expressed by 
 the promise " I will write my law in their inward 
 parts," had been effected by the Spirit independently 
 of the word of truth, or by means of it ; — and whe- 
 ther that word was still to be, to the renewed sinner, 
 " the light of his ket and the lamp of his path," or 
 the immediate intimations of the Spirit to his own 
 mind without it. — In pleading for the independent 
 guidance of the Spirit, Mr Gurney adheres to one 
 of the most objectionable articles of the Quaker sys- 
 tem; an article, too, which, every reader of his works 
 must be sensible, he finds it no easy matter to main- 
 tain in full consistency with his modified sentiments 
 
 * Observations, &c. pages 92, 93. 
 
348 
 
 on other points, and especially with the high ground 
 he occupies regarding the paramount authority of the 
 Holy Scriptures. We have an exemplification of 
 this in the very sentences I have just quoted, taken 
 in connexion with what immediately follows. u The 
 " law written in the Book, and the law written on 
 " the heart, have . proceeded from the same Author : 
 " — the standard of them both is the will of God: 
 " and therefore they cannot fail to correspond. ,, 
 Granted. The axiom of geometry, that things which 
 are equal to the same thing are equal to one another, 
 cannot be surer. But then, although the truth of 
 the abstract proposition, that the law in the Book 
 and the law in the heart have the divine will for their 
 common standard, — it must be not less evident, that 
 to us there is no such standard. Where have we 
 any standard to which we can bring the law in the 
 Booh ? When the Book has been ascertained (as it 
 has been by many infallible proofs) to have been 
 '•' given by inspiration of God," — then the law con- 
 tained in it becomes to us the infallible record of his 
 will ; — which is, in effect, the same with its being 
 the standard of that will. We have no standard by 
 which to try the law in the Book; but the law in the 
 Book becomes the standard by which we must try 
 every thing else that professes to be an intimation of 
 the divine will. What follows? Why, that the law 
 in the Book must be the standard of the law in the 
 
349 
 
 heart. But if we had, in the sense in which true 
 Friends contend for them, the direct, independent, per- 
 ceptible, and infallible intimations of the Spirit to our 
 own minds, not only should we have no need for such 
 a standard, but we might even, with truth and safety, 
 reverse the position, and make these intimations the 
 standard of those on .record, — that is, make the law 
 in the heart the standard of the law in the Book ! — 
 But the truth is, the law in the heart and the law in 
 the Book are not to be regarded as two distinct 
 things, of which each is produced independently of 
 the other, and which, when afterwards compared, are 
 found to correspond. The law in the Book already 
 exists ; and its existence is assumed in the promise 
 — " I will put my law in their mind and write it in 
 their heart." The promise relates to the law which 
 God had given to Israel. He had given it on tables 
 of stone; and the spirit and substance of the new 
 covenant promise is, that it should be written " not on 
 tables of stone, but on the fleshly tables of the heart;" 
 — that is, that the Lord, by his Spirit, would impart 
 a spiritual knowledge of it, in all its precepts, and 
 dispositions of heart in conformity with its dictates. 
 Mr Gurney is far from setting up the law in the 
 heart as a standard for the law in the Book. On the 
 contrary, he immediately subjoins : — " Scripture is a 
 " divinely authorized test, by which we must try, not 
 " only all our sentiments in matters of doctrine, but 
 2 G 
 
350 
 
 " all our notions and opinions respecting right and 
 ' ; wrong. * To the law and to the testimony; if they 
 " speak not according to this rule, it is because there 
 " is no light in them/ " But in this, I apprehend, 
 Mr Gurney is hardly consistent with himself. If 
 "we are all furnished" (independently of the word) 
 " with an inward Guide and Monitor, who makes 
 "his voice known to us, and who, if faithfully 
 " obeyed and closely followed, will infallibly conduct 
 " us into true virtue and happiness, because he leads 
 " us into a real conformity with the will of God ;" — 
 where is our need of such a test ? If the Spirit's 
 voice is a known voice, and requires no more, in 
 order to our being infallibly guided into all virtue, 
 than being "faithfully obeyed and closely followed" 
 a test appears to me a very nugatory thing. And 
 who could have expected a writer, by whom the "per- 
 ceptible guidance of the Spirit" is spoken of in terms 
 so decided and strong, to fall into the ordinary phra- 
 seology of other persons and other sects, and conde- 
 scend to speak of " our notions and opinions respect- 
 ing right and wrong?'* This is coming down to com- 
 mon ground. Are the dictates, then, of this percep- 
 tible and infallible guide, to be regarded, after all, as 
 no more than " notions and opinions," which require, 
 ere they can be adopted and followed, to be scrutin- 
 ized by the standard of " the Law and the Testi- 
 mony ?" — Expressions of a similar kind do at times 
 
351 
 
 escape Mr Gurney, from which (without, I trust, 
 incurring the charge of catching at little incidental 
 slips, or making a man an offender for a word) I am 
 constrained to infer, that his views respecting the rule 
 of faith and duty are more in accordance with those 
 of his brethren of other denominations than, as a 
 Friend, he is willing to think; and that, in pleading, 
 as he does, at once for the paramount authority of 
 " the Law and the Testimony," and for the percep- 
 tible and independent guidance of an infallible Mo- 
 nitor, he pleads for tw r o things which cannot consist- 
 ently be maintained together. The terms in which 
 Mr Gurney invariably speaks of the Holy Scriptures, 
 — and which it is my delight to find him using, — 
 are such as to convert those employed by him re- 
 specting the independent influence and guidance of 
 the Holy Spirit into little more than w 7 ords without 
 meaning. 
 
 Nowhere does this more remarkably appear, than 
 in his " Strictures on certain parts of an anonymous 
 pamphlet entitled The Truth Vindicated," &c; which 
 have just come into my hands. Most cordially do 
 I concur with him in the censures — far from unduly 
 severe — which he there bestows upon the author of 
 that work, to whom I have before had occasion re- 
 peatedly to advert. " The Truth Vindicated " cer- 
 tainly, in some parts of it, makes as near approaches 
 to absolute deism, as it is possible to do without an 
 2g2 
 
£52 
 
 open and unqualified disavowal of the inspiration and 
 authority of the Scriptures. When I spoke of the 
 author formerly* as a " staunch and honest Friend," 
 and commended him, though not for his logic nor for 
 his spirit, yet for his " manly and unblenching avowal 
 of his principles," I would not be understood as in- 
 sinuating a like disrespect for the sacred volume even 
 amongst the ancient Quakers ; — though it has for- 
 merly been shown that, in one or two points, Barclay 
 himself is far from being clear of similar ground of 
 reprehension ; — and though I cannot disguise the 
 conviction, that the old Quaker doctrine, — the doc- 
 trine of immediate inspiration as the common privilege 
 of New Testament believers, — had the unavoidable 
 tendency to the depreciation of the Scriptures, — a 
 tendency which only discovers itself in " The Truth 
 Vindicated" with somewhat more than its legitimate 
 amount. My judgment and my feelings being in 
 thorough accordance with those of Mr Gurney in all 
 that he says of the paramount authority of the word 
 of God as contained in the Volume of Revelation, I 
 cannot see how he can be in harmony with himself, 
 till he has thrown aside the remnant of Quaker doc- 
 trine to which he still tenaciously clings ; — I mean 
 this immediate revelation, under the modified desig- 
 nation by which he has chosen to qualify and to re- 
 
 * Page 23. 
 
353 
 
 commend it. I cannot but fancy to myself the sur- 
 prise and indignation with which some of the old 
 fathers of Quakerism would be stirred, by the attempt 
 to explain away, to so great an extent, their most 
 favourite dogmas, and to fritter down the meaning of 
 their phraseology, till there is hardly left a shred of 
 distinction between them and the Christian world at 
 large. — I frankly own, that the anonymous author of 
 " The Truth Vindicated" does not appear to me — 
 bating the unseemly scornfulness and the insufferable 
 grossness and insolence of his style, — to go very far 
 beyond the sequences that are fairly deducible from 
 the doctrine of immediate inspiration as avowed in 
 the writings of the older Friends ; and I believe there 
 are not a few in the Body now, who conceive that 
 author to have made a bold and consistent stand for 
 the true original principles of Quakerism. I cannot 
 but consider him, on the ground of these principles, 
 as sufficiently warranted in saying — " Therefore, 
 " when men assert that the writings of other men 
 " who lived centuries ago, and wrote under the in- 
 " fluence of the Holy Spirit, are 'a higher rule' to 
 " me than the influence of the same Holy Spirit upon 
 " my own mind ; I surely am not to be dissuaded by 
 " an assertion, grounded upon no reason whatever, 
 " that these admit of no comparison."* If the pre- 
 
 * Truth Vindicated, 2d edit. p. 91* 
 
 2g3 
 
354 
 
 mises be granted, of the reality of immediate inspi- 
 ration, is not this perfectly fair ? If the direct dic- 
 tates of the Holy Spirit are indeed enjoyed now, 
 why should not his modern dictates " admit of com- 
 parison'* with his ancient dictates — the Spirit now, 
 with the Spirit then ? This very word — "then" — 
 when applied to the sacred volume, comprehends a 
 vast period of time. Centuries and millenniums 
 passed away between the writing of the first and the 
 last books in the inspired canon : but we are not 
 shocked at the idea of comparing the Spirit in John 
 with the Spirit in Moses. If the Spirit be given 
 still, in the form of immediate communication, of the 
 mind and will of God, why should we be at all 
 startled at the thought of comparing the Spirit in 
 any New Testament believer with the Spirit in either 
 Moses or John ? On the supposition of such com- 
 munications being made, they ?nust be of the same 
 authority ; for it is the authority of the same Spirit, 
 — divine authority. — And this leads me to notice the 
 manner in which Mr Gurney softens down, — in a 
 way which he means for eulogy, but which they, I 
 ween, would have disowned as insult, — the terms 
 used of old by the fathers of Quakerism, respecting 
 the primary and the secondary ride. After having 
 discussed this point so much at large, I am not going 
 to resume it. But when Mr Gurney alleges that the 
 distinction was not, by the " early Friends," intended 
 
355 
 
 11 to apply to the question of authority, but only to 
 that of order and dignity" I cannot think he does 
 these early Friends justice — By the Spirit, if they 
 meant any thing at all distinctive of themselves from 
 other professed Christians, — they meant the Spirit 
 as imparted to their own minds. It was in this sense 
 alone that the Spirit could be a rule at all. Now in 
 this sense, the Spirit was not, in point of fact, first 
 in order, — nor was it possible for them to think so, 
 without thinking their own existence to have preced- 
 ed that of apostles and prophets : and to fancy them 
 to have meant by the term primary merely that the 
 Spirit had a prior existence to the communications 
 that proceeded from him, would be to impute to 
 them, with the view of protecting them from the 
 charge of heresy, a weakness absolutely infantile. 
 If, in their use of it, the term had reference to order, 
 there was, without question, associated with this the 
 inferential notion of superiority. — And then, as to 
 dignity — there was not surely more of dignity in the 
 dictates of the Spirit to their own minds (which was 
 what the}' meant when they called the Spirit a Rule) 
 than in the dictates of the Spirit to prophets and 
 apostles : — and if any should allege all they meant 
 to have been, that the Holy Spirit, personally con- 
 sidered, had more dignity than his communications, 
 — they would make them mean, if the sentiment 
 were analysed, neither more nor less than — nothing 
 
356 
 
 at all : — for certainly, as a Rule, the Spirit, person- 
 ally considered, was to them nothing. He was to 
 them nothing, except as being in them, as their in- 
 fallible monitor and guide, imparting to them his 
 direct communications. It was these, therefore, 
 that they regarded as the primary rule ; and still, 
 beyond all controversy, with the idea of superior- 
 ity involved in that of priority, — Mr Gurney has 
 more good sense than to suppose them to have 
 meant the Spirit personally, " They looked upon 
 the influence of the Spirit as the primary rule," 
 says he ; and he proceeds to assign their reasons 
 for so regarding and so calling it. But with all 
 my high estimation of Mr Gurney's integrity and 
 candour, it is not without some little difficulty I can 
 persuade myself of his being, in his own mind, fully 
 convinced that these reasons would have been ho- 
 mologated (to use a term of Scottish law) — that is, 
 appropriated and acknowledged as their own, — by 
 the " early Friends ;" inasmuch as they are reasons 
 which involve nothing peculiar — unless it be in a 
 small fraction of their import — but might obtain the 
 concurrent assent of Christians universally : — " They 
 " looked upon the influence of the Spirit as the 
 " primary rule, because it is the very source of true 
 " religious knowledge :" — who will question this ? — - 
 w because it operated among men before the Scrip- 
 " tures were written, and still operates, in a certain 
 
357 
 
 " measure, where they are unknown :" — slightly 
 qualified, who will question this ? — " and because it 
 " is the originating power from which the Scriptures 
 " themselves proceeded :" — and who, we may em- 
 phatically say, will question this ? — I ask Mr Gur- 
 ney, as an honest man — and such I firmly believe 
 him to be — whether these were the points which 
 were denied or questioned when Quakerism had its 
 origin, — and whether these were the grounds on 
 which its originators founded their system of distinc- 
 tive principles and practices? — Was it not "the in- 
 fluence of the Spirit" in themselves, that they re- 
 garded as the 'primary rule? — and did they not 
 mean, by calling it the primary rule, that this in- 
 fluence was entitled to be first regarded and first 
 obeyed? — and when they called the Scriptures a se- 
 condary rule, did they not intend to place it in subor- 
 dination to the primary, — to be attended to only in 
 the second place, — its dictates being indirect, while 
 those to themselves were immediate ? And I ask 
 Mr Gurney farther, whether any genuine Friend, 
 of the old school, would have taken into his lips, or 
 recorded with his pen, the sentiment — " If we give 
 up the Holy Scriptures as the test — the adequate 
 and only written test — by which supposed revelations 
 respecting either doctrine or practice must be tried, 
 we at once yield ourselves a prey to wild and unre- 
 strained enthusiasm?" — Could any opponent of Qua- 
 
358 
 
 kerism desire stronger language than this, in re- 
 gard to all pretensions to immediate revelation, — and 
 the danger of trusting to any thing of the kind ? 
 And is such an admission in harmony with Mr Gur- 
 ney's own representations of " the inward Guide or 
 " Monitor, who, if faithfully followed and closely 
 " obeyed, leads infallibly into a real conformity with 
 " the will of God ?" I am unable to reconcile the 
 two representations. I believe the former — the ad- 
 mission of the perilous tendency of trusting to " sup- 
 posed revelations," to be, of the two, by much the 
 nearer to truth ; and it is only, after all, a stronger 
 and more unfettered expression of what Mr Gurney, 
 with somewhat more of cautious discretion, states in 
 his larger work, when he suggests some of the va- 
 rious sources of illusion to which the professed pos- 
 sessors of immediate Divine influence are exposed. — 
 The views of this intelligent and highly gifted 
 Friend respecting the authority of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, as the " ultimate appeal in every case of doubt 
 " or controversy in relation to matters either of doc- 
 " trine or of moral principle," are worthy of himself, 
 and worthy of the Book of God, and such, in every 
 respect, as must meet the approbation of Christians 
 of all denominations : — " There lies no appeal from 
 " it to any higher authority whatsoever ; for the sim- 
 " plest and most powerful of all reasons — namely, 
 11 that the authority of the declarations which God 
 
359 
 
 " has made is the authority of God himself." But 
 by his enlightened views of this subject, some modi- 
 fication of the sentiments held and avowed by the 
 older Quakers, respecting the direct communications 
 of the Spirit to the souls of God's people now, was 
 rendered indispensable. It is on the ground of 
 these sentiments that both Dr Hancock and the 
 author of " Truth Vindicated," go such unwarrant- 
 able lengths in regard to dependence on immediate 
 guidance. I say unwarrantable, when I speak of 
 them in themselves ; but really, if the truth of the 
 sentiments were assumed, I should be at a loss 
 for a reason to prevent my going along with the 
 former, when he says — "I cannot admit that the 
 " Scriptures, divine and excellent as they are, and 
 " blessed, I trust, as means auxiliary to salvation, to 
 " thousands and millions, are to be placed above the 
 " teaching of God's Holy Spirit by immediate reve- 
 " latio?i;" — or with the latter, when, in addition to 
 what has already been quoted, he says — " I cannot 
 " therefore see how any higher rule can by possibii- 
 " ity exist, than that by which we are led, and in 
 " which we are to walk— even the blessed Spirit of 
 " Christ" Such views as Mr Gurney exhibits of 
 the paramount and ultimate and only authority of 
 the divine oracles, are calculated to repress these 
 < : great swelling words of vanity:" — but it maybe 
 worth his while to consider, how far the salutary 
 
360 
 
 tendency of his views on this point, will not, to a 
 degree which he would himself lament, be counter- 
 acted by the manner in which he still writes on the 
 " perceptible guidance of the Spirit." 
 
 There is one sentence of Mr Gurney's in the 
 " Strictures" referred to, which requires only to be 
 followed out, and separated from surrounding matter, 
 to form a correct representation of the truth on this 
 all-important subject — " That in order to a saving 
 c - apprehension of the truths contained in the Sacred 
 " Volume, the enlightening influence of the Holy 
 " Ghost is absolutely indispensable."* O that Mr 
 Gurney would but abide by the simple principle in- 
 volved in these few words ; recognising the Holy 
 Scriptures as the source of saving knowledge, and 
 the Holy Spirit as the Author of spiritual illumina- 
 tion in the soul, in order to the right discernment 
 and believing acceptance of the truths which they 
 reveal ! — The principle is in full concord with another 
 passage from his pen, in his Essay on Love to God. 
 He is speaking of the change necessary in sinful 
 man, in order to his fitness for fellowship with God 
 and for the joys of heaven. " In effecting this 
 " blessed change," says he, " in the affections of 
 " fallen man, the Holy Spirit makes use of the gos- 
 " pel of our Lord Jesus Christ, as his grand appoint- 
 
 * Strictures, &c. page 23. 
 
361 
 
 w ed instrument. That gospel, written in the Holy 
 " Scriptures, and preached by the Lord's messen- 
 " gers, is a spiritual weapon of heavenly mould ; 
 " and, when wielded by a Divine hand, it penetrates 
 " the heart, and becomes ' the power of God unto 
 " salvation.'" — Thus, in conversion, according to 
 Mr Gurney himself, the Spirit is the agent, and 
 the truth the means. Let the same principle be 
 applied to the subsequent advancement of the re- 
 newed soul in the divine life, — the process of pro- 
 gressive sanctification ; — in this too let the Spirit be 
 acknowledged the agent, and the truth the means ; — 
 and Mr Gurney is in full agreement with the whole 
 body of evangelical professors of the Christian faith. 
 And that this is the true scriptural representation of 
 the case, evidence might be accumulated from the 
 sacred volume. Our Lord prays — John xvii. 17. 
 ;i Sanctify them through thy truth ; thy word is 
 truth :'' — and Peter says respecting the Gentile be- 
 lievers, — Acts xv. 8, 9. " And God, who knoweth 
 the hearts, bare them record, giving them the Holy 
 Ghost, even as he did unto us : and put no difference 
 between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith." 
 The truth or word of God, then, — received in faith, 
 — is the instrumental means of sanctification ; and 
 the Spirit of God, freely bestowed by Him, is the 
 agent in giving efficiency to the means. — Such is the 
 invariable statement of the Holy Scriptures. I have 
 2h 
 
362 
 
 already, in a former letter, cited passages in support 
 of it. I may be allowed here a remark or two upon 
 one more — 1 Cor. ii. 14. " But the natural man 
 receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for 
 they are foolishness unto him ; neither can he know 
 them, because they are spiritually discerned." This 
 is plain. We need not trouble ourselves with any 
 critical strictures, to ascertain the meaning of the 
 designation " the natural man :" — it is quite enough 
 for us to be assured, as we are by the apostle in the 
 preceding chapter, that it includes, not merely the 
 sensualist, or the man who gives himself up to ani- 
 mal gratifications and worldly pleasures, but also, 
 and even especially, the philosophers, the men who 
 " sought after wisdom," — to whom, more than to 
 any other class whatever, " the things of the 
 Spirit" appeared "foolishness." See 1 Cor. i. 18 — 
 25. — By "the things of the Spirit" are undoubtedly 
 to be understood the things which God had already 
 revealed by his Spirit to his commissioned and ac- 
 credited servants — Chap. ii. 10. and which they 
 spoke to their fellow-men, as the same Spirit gave 
 them utterance, verse 13. These " things of the 
 Spirit" then, correspond with " the testimony of 
 God" which they " declared," verse 1. — of which 
 testimony the great and essential subject was " Jesus 
 Christ — Christ crucified," verse 2. — Those who de- 
 clared this testimony were the " ministers by whom 
 
363 
 
 the Corinthians had believed" — that is, by whose 
 ministry the testimony which was the object of their 
 faith had been imparted to them — Chap. iii. 5. iv. 
 15. and xv. 1, 2. The gospel was declared by the 
 apostles ; through their ministry it had come to the 
 Corinthians; and, while by multitudes it was esteemed 
 " foolishness," those to whom the apostle now wrote 
 had discerned its excellence, and received it as the 
 truth of God. This discernment they owed to the 
 influence of God's Spirit. It was by the Spirit's 
 own illumination that the suitableness, consistency, 
 and glory of "the things of the Spirit" — the discover- 
 ies made in the gospel — were perceived. — Their " dis- 
 cerning" and "knowing'' the things of the Spirit 
 does not mean their receiving themselves any direct 
 communication of truth to their minds, independent 
 of apostolic testimony ; — but precisely that " enlight- 
 ening influence of the Holy Ghost," which Mr Gur- 
 ney affirms " absolutely indispensable to a saving 
 apprehension of the truths contained in the Sacred 
 Volume :" — for the truths now contained there are 
 the very same with those which were of old deliver- 
 ed to men by the living voice of God's inspired mes- 
 sengers. — It must further be sufficiently manifest, 
 that, when the apostle affirms the inability of the 
 natural man to know the things of the Spirit, he in- 
 tends, not a mere knowledge of their meaning, (for 
 the knowledge of that is necessary to their being 
 2h2 
 
364 
 
 disbelieved and rejected, — necessary to their being 
 accounted foolishness,) bat the knowledge of them 
 in such a way as that they no longer appeared 
 foolishness, as they had done before, but, what 
 they really were, " the power of God and the 
 wisdom of God ;" that is, the knowledge of them 
 as divinely true and divinely excellent. This know- 
 ledge is the result of spiritual discernment ; and 
 this spiritual discernment, of the real but inexpli- 
 cable operation of the Holy Spirit in the mind and 
 heart. — There is thus a twofold work of the Spirit. 
 There is his work in inspiration properly so called, — 
 the infallible communication of divine truth to the 
 minds of those "holy men of God" whose special 
 commission it was to be, to make known that truth, 
 with suitable attestation, to others : — and there is 
 his work in ordinary spiritual illumination, or the 
 removal from the mind and heart of those preposses- 
 sions against the truth thus revealed and attested, 
 by which the discernment of its divine excellence is 
 prevented, and it continues to be rejected as false- 
 hood, and scorned as foolishness. For this latter 
 description of divine influence we " earnestly con- 
 tend," as for a part of " the faith once delivered unto 
 the saints." The results of the other we consider as 
 having been completed in the Holy Scriptures, — the 
 only writings which we acknowledge as " given by 
 inspiration of God." — Mr Gurney " conceives, that 
 
365 
 
 " every true Quaker is prepared cordially to acknow- 
 " ledge that the Holy Scriptures, and they alone, 
 " are a divinely authorized record of all the doctrines 
 " which we are required to believe, and of all the 
 " moral principles that are to regulate our actions — 
 " not to mention the luminous declaration which they 
 " contain of our relative and particular duties."* — 
 This appears to reduce the difference between the 
 Quakers and others, on this subject, to a very narrow 
 point. It would be unseemly presumption in me to 
 dispute the accuracy of Mr Gurney's statements re- 
 specting the views entertained by his own Body : — but 
 really it is impossible to read the writings of the older 
 Quakers — the Fathers of the family — without being 
 sensible, that there is a prodigious softening down, on 
 the part of this writer, of their opinions and language. 
 When he represents " every true Quaker" as ready to 
 acknowledge the Scriptures, "a?id them alone" as "a 
 divinely authorized record" of doctrine and duty, he 
 says what, in a certain sense, is true. But we have 
 formerly had sufficient evidence before us of the 
 qualifying limitations with which the representation 
 must be understood. It is truth ; but it can hardly 
 be said to be the whole truth. Is it not equally true, 
 that, while the Holy Scriptures, and they alone, are 
 " a divinely authorized Record" of the mind and will 
 
 * Strictures, &c. page 23. 
 
 2h 3 
 
366 
 
 of God, — yet u every true Quaker/' — every genuine 
 follower of Fox, and Penn, and Barclay, — every con- 
 sistent advocate of the ' ; inward light" and of the 
 "primary and secondary rule," — holds also the divine 
 authority of communications still made directly by 
 the Spirit to the minds of God's servants and people? 
 Supposing it granted, then, that the Holy Scriptures 
 are the only divinely authorized Record of truth 
 and duty, of how little avail is such an admission, if 
 men are still to be taught that their first attention is 
 due to the movements of the Spirit himself in 
 their own minds ; — that it is in themselves, if they 
 would but give this attention, that the Spirit " makes 
 all things manifest ;" — that this is the guide whom, 
 in the first instance, they are to follow, while the 
 Scriptures, being something merely outward, are to 
 be regarded as " not the chief rule,"* but subordinate 
 to this primary and superior direction ? If the quo- 
 tations formerly made, from Barclay and others, are 
 not sufficient to bear me out in holding this to have 
 been one of the elementary and essential principles 
 of primitive Quakerism, I must own myself either 
 mistaken or misled. My present conviction, how- 
 ever, is, that in so far as Mr Gurney holds a senti- 
 ment, and speaks a language, different from this, he 
 must be considered as having, to that extent, aban- 
 
 * Barcluy. 
 
367 
 
 cloned Quakerism. And indeed, on this and on 
 various other points, it cannot fail to strike the most 
 superficial reader, what a perfect contrast there is 
 between the writings of Mr Gurney and those of 
 " the early Friends." I am very far from wishing 
 Mr Gurney to take a single step out of Quakerism 
 in points where Quakerism is truth. In other points, 
 however, he has already taken several, — and these, 
 too, even larger strides than any that now remain 
 for him to take. May the Divine Spirit be gra- 
 ciously pleased, by means of that complete revelation 
 which He has given us, to lead, not him only, but 
 you, my friends, and myself, and every fellow-chris- 
 tian and fellow-man around us, — into all truth! 
 
 When I spoke of offering a few observations on 
 some of the practical bearings of the theory of im- 
 mediate manifestation, or " perceptible guidance," I 
 had in view the two great subjects of the ministry 
 and the observance of external ordinances. You 
 have various other peculiarities besides these and 
 such as arise out of them ; — those especially which 
 relate to war, to oaths, to plainness of speech, and 
 to apparel. On these it was never my intention even 
 to touch. My immediate object was to consider 
 principles, — and such principles as were manifestly 
 primary and fundamental. Even into the sub- 
 jects of the ministry and of ritual observances I have 
 
368 
 
 no intention of entering. They are subjects of high 
 importance, and would require a more extended ar- 
 gumentation than it is now in my power to under- 
 take. All that I purpose at present is, to offer a few 
 brief remarks on the degree of authority, in deter- 
 mining such questions, ascribed by Mr Gurney, and 
 by Quakers generally, to the Spirit's " perceptible 
 guidance." 
 
 It is before proceeding to show that " the distin- 
 guishing views and practices of the Society of 
 Friends are derived from the essential principles of 
 the law of God" — "arising directly or indirectly 
 out of these principles," — that Mr Gurney intro- 
 duces, as preparatory to his argument, the chapter of 
 his work on the "perceptible influence and guidance 
 of the Spirit:" — and, in the conclusion of that chap- 
 ter, the reason of this arrangement appears. He 
 there expresses, with all possible clearness, the bear- 
 ing of this doctrine on the adoption of those peculi- 
 arities by which Quakers are distinguished. — " Now 
 the first argument to be adduced," says he, " in sup- 
 port of this position" — (the position that the pecu- 
 liarities of Friends arise out of the principles of the 
 divine law) — " is immediately connected with the 
 " doctrine unfolded in the present chapter. If the 
 " question be addressed to us, why do we consider it 
 " to be our duty to adopt our several religious pecu- 
 " liarities, we may answer, because we believe we have 
 
369 
 
 " been led into them by the Spirit of truth.* The 
 " casual observer may, indeed, attribute our mainte- 
 " nance of them to the mere force of habit and edu- 
 " cation ; and certainly, there is much reason to ap- 
 " prehend, that, with too many amongst us, they rest 
 " upon no better foundation. Nevertheless, you whom 
 " I am now addressing can scarcely fail to be aware, 
 " that, with real Friends, the adoption and punctual 
 " observance of such a line of conduct are not only 
 " matters of honest principle, but are truly the con- 
 " sequence of obedience to their inward guide. It is 
 " a fact which the world can scarcely be expected to 
 " notice, but which is well known to every experi- 
 " enced Quaker, and will not be denied by any per- 
 " sons who possess an intimate knowledge of the So- 
 " ciety, that the very same guiding and governing 
 €i 'principle , which leads the sincere-hearted and seri- 
 " ous among Friends into the practice of universally 
 " acknowledged Christian virtues, leads them also into 
 " these peculiarities, I am not asserting, that such 
 " would necessarily be the experience of all persons 
 " who endeavour to follow the guidance of the Spirit ; 
 " nor would I, in any respect, venture to set limits 
 " to the sovereignty, freedom, scope, and variety, of 
 " divine operation. I assert only that this is our own 
 " experience. Such, therefore, being our experience ? 
 
 The Italics throughout the paragraph are Mr Gurney's. 
 
370 
 
 " we cannot but derive from it a strong and satisfac- 
 " tory conviction that our religious peculiarities ap- 
 " pertain to the law of God ; for it is certain that the 
 " Spirit of truth, by whose influence alone men are 
 " made truly righteous, and brought into conformity 
 " with the divine will, would never lead any of the 
 " followers of Jesus into a course of conduct which 
 " is not founded on the principles of that law. The 
 " inward manifestations of the Spirit are, in them- 
 " selves, the law of God written on the heart." * 
 
 This is a paragraph which would have come better 
 from the pen of George Fox or Robert Barclay, than 
 it does from that of Joseph John Gurney. To dis- 
 cuss its contents at large would necessarily lead me 
 to much repetition. It suggests, however, a few 
 reflections, which he must pardon me for frankly 
 making : — 
 
 1. It is perfectly true, — " certain," as Mr Gurney 
 affirms it to be, — that " the Spirit of truth could never 
 " lead any of God's children into a course of conduct 
 " which is not founded on the principles of the di- 
 " vine law :" — but has Mr Gurney forgotten the va- 
 rious sources of illusion, by which, upon his own 
 admission, the dictates of the human imagination are 
 liable to be mistaken for the suggestions of the Spirit? 
 The Spirit of God can never lead astray : — but a 
 
 * Observations, &c. pages 97, 98. 
 
371 
 
 man's fancy may lead him astray, — variously and 
 wildly astray,— in regard to the fact of his having 
 the Spirit, — and, consequently, in regard to whatever 
 he may conceive to himself, or hold out to others, 
 as a dictate of the Spirit. There can hardly be a 
 principle more illusory, as a ground for the observ- 
 ance or non-observance of particular institutions. 
 We may imagine ourselves " led into them by the 
 Spirit of truth," when we have been led only by the 
 constitutional tendencies, or the educational, and 
 even the capricious and unaccountable, predilections, 
 of our own minds. 
 
 2. Is it consistent with the principle, so distinctly 
 admitted by Mr Gurney, of the Holy Scriptures 
 being the authorized record of truth and duty, to 
 have recourse to the suggestions of an inward guide, 
 and to expose ourselves, consequently, to so many 
 risks of delusion ? Why not at once " to the law 
 and to the testimony ?" Is there any necessity for 
 more than an authorized record of the divine will, 
 and a disposition humbly and implicitly to follow it? 
 If it be alleged, that the record furnishes us chiefly 
 with principles, while we are left to the direction of 
 the inward guide in their application ; I answer, first, 
 that, even if this were true, there is a vast extent of 
 room left for self-deception and extravagance in the 
 application of principles ; as the history of rites and 
 ceremonies in the Christian church too amply testi- 
 
372 
 
 fies : — and, secondly, that it is not true ; there being 
 actually contained in the record, in the form both of 
 precept and example, such directions respecting ex- 
 ternal observances in the churches of Christ, as have 
 misled the whole Christian world except the Quakers, 
 and have required all the learning and ingenuity of 
 the most learned and ingenious members of that 
 community, to frame even a plausible apology for 
 their omission. I am satisfied that no better exem- 
 plification could be produced of the danger of our 
 being left to ourselves, — or left to the suggestions of 
 any supposed " inward guide," in the application of 
 principles, than the manner in which the Friends 
 themselves have disposed of these observances. 
 
 3. In examining the Scriptures to discover the 
 will of God, there is nothing so important and neces- 
 sary as freedom from all prepossession in behalf of 
 any one principle or practice, more than another. 
 Is it, then, a really favourable state of mind in 
 which to come to the examination of the authorized 
 Record, when there is a previous confidence in the 
 intimations of another Guide, — a prepossession in 
 favour of certain principles, and of certain applica- 
 tions of those principles, into which the subject of 
 this guidance persuades himself he has been divinely 
 led? Will not such a bias unavoidably sway the 
 mind in one direction, — as the bias of a bowl on the 
 smooth sward inclines it toward the point it was de- 
 
373 
 
 signed to reach? We are sure to find what we are pre- 
 viously bent on finding. It will not do to say, that this 
 bias is from the Spirit of God, — and that it cannot, 
 therefore, sway the mind otherwise than in a right 
 direction,— that is, towards the point of conformity 
 with the mind of God in his word: — for this would 
 be, most flagrantly, to beg the question, — to assume 
 at once the divinity and the actual reality of the 
 contested guidance. — Such a prepossession is far 
 from being the less dangerous, that it is devout. 
 Its having the sanction, in the mind, of a religious 
 principle, only augments the hazard, by imparting 
 to it a sacredness which the pious spirit fears to con- 
 travene. The better course, surely, is to come di- 
 rectly to the record, with a mind, through the sup- 
 plicated influence of the Spirit of truth, humbly and 
 steadfastly determined upon implicit submission, — 
 seeking, with all "simplicity and godly sincerity," 
 an answer to the one question, " Lord, what wouldst 
 thou have me to do?" 
 
 4. It seems very unaccountable, that, in such a 
 connexion as this, Mr Gurney should introduce the 
 sentiment, that " the inward manifestations of the 
 " Spirit are, in themselves, the law of God written 
 " on the hearth — Strange ! The subject on the dis- 
 cussion of which Mr Gurney was about to enter, was 
 the propriety or impropriety, the obligation or non- 
 obligation, of certain " outward religious points" by 
 2 i 
 
374 
 
 which the Friends are distinguished from other 
 Christian professors. In what way a question of 
 such a nature could be determined by the " law 
 written on the heart," it is not easy to see. That 
 law is, essentially, the law of love, — being summed 
 up, by the highest authority, in the two great pre- 
 cepts of love to God and love to men. What con- 
 nexion has this "law written on the heart" with the 
 settlement of the controversy respecting the ob- 
 servance of water-baptism and the Lord's Supper > 
 Were I to try the obligation of these two ordinances 
 by their influence, respectively, upon love, the set- 
 tlement of the controversy should not hang one mo- 
 ment in doubt; — their tendency, when rightly un- 
 derstood and scripturally celebrated, being eminently 
 to the promotion of that divine and divinely blessed 
 
 principle — But the plain truth is, that the ■»«> 
 
 >lr 
 matters, which can be determined by nothir 
 
 .) 
 than the existence or non-existence of a divine enact- 
 ment; and that this is what can be found nowhere 
 but in the Book. The attempt to determine any 
 such points by a reference to " manifestati ns of the 
 Spirit,'' or to the " law written on the heart," 
 is of all processes the most preposterous. Of 
 all questions, those which relate to external ob- 
 servances are the least susceptible of settlement on 
 any other ground than that of divine prescription ; — 
 and, if Friends profess to have been " led into their 
 
375 
 
 peculiarities/' whether of observance or of non- 
 observance, " by the Spirit of truth,'' it is an appeal 
 to the New Testament alone that can determine, 
 whether that Spirit, or their own imagination, has 
 been their real guide. 
 
 5. It is not denied, that spirituality is the distin- 
 guishing characteristic of New Testament worship ; 
 that " under the Christian dispensation, the worship 
 " of God is not to be formal, ceremonial, or typical, 
 " but simply spiritual."*' — As a general principle, we 
 grant this ; we advocate it ; we are thankful for it ; 
 we delight in it. But we deny that this character- 
 istic spirituality lays us under any necessity to ex- 
 clude all external observance whatever. A character- 
 istic distinction may exist, and exist in a remarkable 
 degree, without such absolute exclusiveness. I ap- 
 peal *o Mr Gurney himself. He says — " The two 
 ms of worship are described as completely 
 ?t : the one was about to die away, the other 
 " to be established. The old worship consisted prin- 
 " cipally in the performance of typical rites. The 
 " new worship was of a precisely opposite charac- 
 " ter."f I am not going to enter into any dispute 
 with Mr Gurney respecting the amount of spiritual- 
 ity required in the worship of the Old Economy. I 
 only wish him, — and I wish you, my friends, — to 
 
 Observations, &c. p. 100. f Ibid. p. 117. 
 
 2 i2 
 
376 
 
 observe the qualifying word which he uses respect- 
 ing it : — it " consisted principally in the performance 
 of typical rites." This, it seems, was sufficient td 
 justify its designation as worldly and carnal. On 
 what consistent ground, then, is absolute exclusive- 
 ness, in regard to all outward ceremonies, insisted 
 upon as necessary to entitle the New Economy to 
 the designation of spiritual? Is it not here ad- 
 mitted to be of a "precisely opposite character" to 
 the old, if it consists principally of what is spiritual ? 
 Surely, the existence of two rites — and these two of 
 such singular simplicity — can never be enough to 
 deprive it of its spiritual character. It is not fair to 
 say, that these observances " plainly appertain to the 
 principle of the Old Covenant;" for on such a ground, 
 all spirituality whatever must be excluded from the 
 worship of the Old Covenant, as " plainly appertain- 
 ing to the principle of the New." — Farther: — Mr 
 Gurney will not deny that, according to our mental 
 constitution, inward affections are capable of being 
 assisted, confirmed, and promoted, by means of ex- 
 ercises and observances that are external. He will 
 not be so uncandid as to question, what accords with 
 universal experience, and with every theory of the 
 human mind. He is very well aware, that the ex- 
 ternality of the Holy Scriptures themselves, — their 
 being something entirely outward, — a mere written, 
 or, in more modern days, a mere printed book, — is 
 
377 
 
 one of the very grounds on which, by his brethren 
 of olden time, and by some not so far back, they 
 have been held in subordination to what is inward, 
 to what is spiritual; — that the spirituality of the 
 New Covenant dispensation is the very principle on 
 which these sacred writings have been under-rated, 
 and have been spoken of and written of, many a time, 
 in terms and in a spirit so unworthy, and so revolt- 
 ing to every mind that feels their real preciousness, 
 from the conviction of their exclusive authority.— 
 The very reading of these Scriptures is an outward 
 act; and an act that has been too frequently ne- 
 glected, under pretext of dependence on more direct 
 and spiritual guidance. Now, if the outward exer- 
 cise of reading the Scriptures is necessary to the 
 mind's receiving information of truth ; is it at all in- 
 consistent with the spirituality of the New Dispen- 
 sation that there should be other outward acts and 
 exercises adapted for the impression of truth ? This 
 is the real use of the few and simple rites of New- 
 Testament celebration. They embody and they 
 impress truth ; — and for their efficiency in answering 
 their end, thousands and tens of thousands, of dead 
 and living witnesses, might be summoned to testify. 
 It has often struck my own mind, as one of the many 
 evidences of divine wisdom in the constitution of the 
 Gospel Economy, that while, by the abolition of the 
 manifold typical rites of a burdensome ceremonial, 
 2 i 3 
 
378 
 
 its spirituality stands out in full contrast with the 
 opposite character of the system which preceded it, 
 — there has not been an entire cessation of all appeal 
 to that law of our constitution, by which the out- 
 ward senses are rendered effectually and happily sub- 
 servient to mental and spiritual impression. There 
 is just enough of external observance, appointed by 
 Him who " knoweth what is in man," to answer suffi- 
 ciently this end, without at all affecting the charac- 
 teristic spirituality of the Dispensation. By setting 
 aside even the little that the Head of the Church has 
 sanctioned, Quakerism has marred instead of mend- 
 ing ; as has invariably been the case with every 
 attempt to improve upon divine counsels. " The 
 foolishness of God is wiser than men." — That the 
 principle in our mental constitution, of which I 
 now speak, has, by some religionists, been pushed, 
 in its application, to an unwarrantable extreme, I 
 readily grant. It has introduced crucifixes, and 
 images, and pictures, and gorgeous vestments, and 
 altars, and masses, and all the multiform mum- 
 mery of Romish superstition. But if the Romanists, 
 and some others, have gone to one extreme, the 
 Friends, I conceive, have gone to the other; — if the 
 one have been wrong in multiplying, the other have 
 been wrong in annihilating. Antinomianism has 
 been called the ultraism of grace; Quakerism might, 
 
379 
 
 not less appropriately, be denominated the ultraism 
 of spirituality. The principle of the Quaker sys- 
 tem is, indeed, decidedly more in harmony with the 
 Spirit of the New Testament than that of popish 
 will-worship. But still it is an extreme ; and both 
 the one extreme and the other should teach us the 
 all-important lesson — a lesson which can never be 
 too strongly enforced, or too frequently reiterated 
 
 Of TAKING THE WORD OF THE LORD AS OUR 
 
 ONLY GUIDE. 
 
 I must have done. The various questions on the sub- 
 jects of the ministry, water-baptism, the Lord's Supper, 
 oaths, war, dress, church-taxes, and other points of 
 practical distinction between the Society of Friends 
 and other religious bodies, I must leave untouched. 
 Some of these, indeed, ought scarcely to be considered 
 as distinctive. Nothing is, in strict propriety, entitled 
 to the designation of a distinctive principle or a dis- 
 tinctive practice, which might be held, or which 
 might be done, by members of other denominations, 
 without any relinquishment of the tenets or the ob- 
 servances that constitute their own peculiarities.* 
 
 * This might be exemplified in the case of oaths, and of war, 
 and of taxes for the support of the endowed religion. Their 
 principles on all these subjects have been held by Christians 
 belonging to other denominations than the Friends; and in some 
 
380 
 
 Bat the whole of them together involve topics of 
 discussion, such as might furnish ample materials for 
 another volume, as large as the one I am now draw- 
 ing to a close. It is true, that the questions relative 
 to the ministry, and to the two ordinances of bap- 
 tism and the Lord's Supper, are questions which, to 
 the satisfaction of my own mind, are capable of be- 
 ing brought within very narrow compass. But thus 
 briefly to dispose of them, I could not reasonably 
 expect to be satisfactory to those whom I am ad- 
 dressing; nor would it be consistent with the estima- 
 tion in which I hold such a defender of your system 
 as Joseph John Gurney ; — a writer, whose known 
 character, associated with his scholarship, and taste, 
 and eminent intellectual qualifications, repress effec- 
 tually every sentiment of disrespect, — and whose 
 gentlemanly and Christian spirit (I judge from his 
 writings, not having the pleasure of personal ac- 
 quaintance) preclude as effectually every emotion of 
 irritability or bitterness. — I think it preferable, not 
 to enter on these subjects at all ; but rather to leave 
 it with yourselves to carry out, in their application to 
 them, the principles which it has been my object, io 
 
 instances, especially of late, the Quaker practice as well as the 
 Quaker principle, has, in regard to the last of the three, been 
 followed. They are, however, the only collective body by which 
 these views are avowed, and by which the practice dictated by 
 them is made a term of communion. 
 

 381 
 
 these letters, to establish. The points to which I have 
 directed my assault have been those which I regarded 
 as forming the very citadel of Quakerism. But my 
 aim has been, — 1 say it in the full recollection that 
 the eye of the Searcher of hearts is upon me, — not 
 to overthrow Quakerism, but to overthrow error. 
 If, in any one point, I have aimed a shaft at truth, 
 mistaking it for error, may the mistake, unconsciously 
 committed, be graciously forgiven ! — and if, in any 
 one point, I have done injustice, either to your com- 
 munity collectively, or to any individual who has 
 been or is now a member of it, may the same for- 
 giveness be extended to the unintentional wroog ! — 
 forgiveness from you, and forgiveness from a higher 
 Tribunal ! — I have desired, throughout, to retain 
 upon my mind the remembrance that " the wrath 
 of man worketh not the righteousness of God ;" and 
 that to indulge such a spirit is at once to bring guilt 
 upon ourselves, and, by rousing resentment and jea- 
 lousy, to counterwork our own professed design. — If, 
 in any instance, I have been led to express myself 
 strongly, give me credit when I assure you, that it 
 has been " more in sorrow than in anger," — in vehe- 
 mence against what appeared to me perilous error, 
 not against the persons by whom the error has been 
 maintained. If, by the blessing of God, I shall have 
 succeeded in displacing such error from any mind 
 
382 
 
 in which it may heretofore have lodged, and intro- 
 ducing, in its room, salutary truth, I shall not have 
 written in vain. 
 
 Once more, believe me, 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 Ralph Wardlaw. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 GLASGOW: 
 fULLARTON AND CO., PRINTERS, VILLAFIELD. 
 
 
2R772y 
 
K5£E* 
 
 ^L 
 
 E^ 
 
 ^3>c-r 
 
 
 o 
 
 *r>>- 
 
 ; : >^ 
 
 
 
 £j^ 
 
 7 ^'y^ r 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3& 
 
 7 ->^' 
 
 

 J* 
 
 
 ^m>^ 
 
 ^>^ 
 
 >> > 
 
 .JSSS* 
 
 ?3> 
 
 >^> 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 a* 
 
 ,r»- 
 
 >J> 
 
 5^ _3*r 
 
 UJCJft* 
 
 ~S^ 
 
 
 *&* 
 
 ^3* 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 .!> 
 
 
 *■ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 IS* > 
 
 
 ?-. ■■--= 
 
 
 
 
 te&arj*^ 
 
 'T? >.J3> >>3y>>.^g^ 
 
 l=c£^ 
 
 > ■> >"'j3a»:>,> ^3t^^ 
 
 *5rfe 
 
 >'."> >v> :3».> :>.rSaKl 
 
 +2£*~- > 
 
 ' >> » • ^si^^>- > ^w*:^ -^* 
 
 %3fa* 
 
 -- -^_ "^T'w — ■ i m^ -- - : ^ : C^ ^ 
 
 '^g^_ ■ 
 
 J> > ■-•--» ?J> J> X>_3P^ 
 
 ^»^p ™ 
 
 ■-"» -r ' t* - 1 ^^^ "^ "tT "jiii"'"^ 
 
 
 
 V : ~m>» 
 
 
 ? J 2SE& - ' 
 
 "t>"~3~S S> : :>>^jS5!lfe£> '^^ 
 
 
 3 > >> ^'StS? 
 
 R>-.^?-^^ 
 
 B^VClfC^^ > > 
 
 
 ' ^-T ^r^*Mp 
 
 s^^^ : *r>.^>' ^ - ■ 
 
 
 2Z» y Ti ">^ ^ 
 
 -^ J >^4-?^^^^^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 J^' : - 
 

 llSSSSLSf. C0I «GRESS 
 
 022 015 897 4 
 
 
 
 ^458 
 
 Bg£ 
 
 —> ?-sr^ 
 
 Jiift--^r 
 
 ^iM. 
 
 l^gg! 
 
 
 =^^^S 
 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 5p^ '"j 
 
 r^-p* 
 
 ^Zr ig?i 
 
 > ' ^S^r 
 
 ~^0*.£*0% 
 
 £> 
 
 ~~72Sm~- 
 
 (M ' "^jpS 01 
 
 ,T ^SS] 
 
 BS^ "" 
 
 l'^^^ 
 
 ^£*0fe - 
 
 ^SSii 
 
 SfiTaiS*' ' 
 
 -. si 
 
 »^g. 
 
 
 Ifgpia 
 
 iii > 
 
 
 i5k 
 
 Dg||Hn 
 
 In 
 
 
 l^piS 
 
 
 few; 
 
 a* 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 ^►^ 
 
 00-