■ 
 
Columbia ©ntoeraitp 
 
 intljeCttpofBrmgdrk 
 
 THE LIBRARIES 
 
 Bequest of 
 
 Frederic Bancroft 
 
 1860-1945 
 
AN EXAMINATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CAUSES WHICH LED TO THE SEPARATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 RELIGIOUS SOCIETY 
 
 OF 
 
 FRIENDS 
 
 IN AMERICA, IN 1827-28. 
 
 BY 
 
 SAMUEL M. JANNEY, 
 
 AUTHOR OP "LIFE OF WILLIAM VEXS," "LIFE OF GEORGE FOX," ETC, 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 T. ELLWOOD ZELL, 
 
 17 & 19 SOUTH SIXTH STREET. 
 
 1868. 
 
^It^io 
 
 J £ V 
 
 if 
 
 Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1859, by 
 SAMUEL M. JANNET, 
 
 in the C«rk'8 Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 
 
 District of Virginia. 
 
 6TEKE0TTPED BY J. FAG AN. 
 A - 
 
00 
 
 m 
 
 
 K. 
 
 TO THE READER. 
 
 It will be observed that this work contains several references to 
 preceding chapters in "The History of the Religious Society of 
 Friends," of which it forms the concluding part. On issuing it now 
 in a separate volume, the publisher has not deemed it necessary to 
 make any alterations in those references. 
 
AN EXAMINATION OF THE CAUSES 
 
 WHICH LED TO THE 
 
 SEPAEATION OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY 
 OF FRIENDS IN AMERICA 
 
 IN 1827-28. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The separation that took place in the Society of 
 Friends in America, during the years 1827 and '28, 
 was an event of deep and painful interest to its 
 members, and is still regarded by many, both with- 
 in and without its pale, as a subject of unceasing 
 regret. It was accompanied by alienation of feeling 
 among many who had long been knit together in 
 the closest ties of friendship, and it diminished the 
 salutary influence that the Society had always ex- 
 erted, from the first settlement of the country, in 
 the promotion of every work that tended to the 
 public good. 
 
 The separation was preceded by an exciting con- 
 troversy, in which the doctrines and discipline of 
 the Society were discussed; both parties claiming 
 to hold the tenets and to act upon the principles of 
 
 the early Friends. It becomes necessary, therefore, 
 l* IV— P (5) 
 
O INTRODUCTION". 
 
 in tracing the causes that led to this event, to give a 
 concise statement of the doctrines of the Society in 
 the time of George Fox, together with the system 
 of church government he introduced, and to inquire 
 what changes have since taken place. 
 
 The difficulty and delicacy of this task may, in 
 some measure, be appreciated, by bearing in mind 
 that the Society has never adopted a formal creed ; 
 and that, with the exception of a few points em- 
 braced in the advices of its Yearlv meetings, its 
 doctrines must be sought for in the voluminous 
 writings of its members, which, not being always 
 clear, require to be collated with each other. 
 
 It cannot be supposed that the members of a 
 society gathered from various religious sects, and 
 educated under such diverse influences, would all 
 agree in every point of doctrine. 
 
 Accordingly, we find in their writings some shades 
 of difference, — they did not all u see eye to eye," 
 neither was such uniformity of sentiment considered 
 essential to religious union ; for being united in 
 Christ through the bond of the Spirit, all minor 
 differences were deemed unimportant, or regarded 
 only as incentives to Christian charity. On several 
 occasions, declarations relating to their doctrinal 
 views were published by prominent members of the 
 Society, in order to refute the accusations of their 
 adversaries. These were generally couched in Scrip- 
 ture language, in accordance with the " frequent 
 advice of Geo. Fox to Friends, to keep to Scripture 
 language, terms, words, and doctrines, as taught by 
 the Holy Ghost, in matters of faith, religion, con- 
 
INTKODUCTION. 7 
 
 troversy, and conversation, and not to be imposed 
 upon and drawn into unscriptural terms, invented 
 by men in their human wisdom." 1 
 
 From these declarations, quotations will be found 
 m this treatise, but the question still recurs, in what 
 sense did the authors understand those scriptural 
 phrases ? Did they accept them as generally under- 
 stood by theologians? Or were they led by their 
 own religious experience and the illumination of 
 divine grace, to go deeper, and to find those Ci mys- 
 teries of the kingdom of heaven," which are hidden 
 from the wise and prudent, but revealed unto babes. 
 
 We know that human language, although admi- 
 rable in itself, is but an imperfect medium for the 
 conveyance of thought. Words are signs or symbols 
 of ideas, which being held up before us in speech 
 or writing, call up in our minds the images or ideas 
 we have previously acquired by education, expe- 
 rience, or reflection. But the education and expe- 
 rience of mankind are exceedingly diverse, ai.d 
 hence it may happen that some words or phrawes 
 will not convey to different individuals precisely the 
 same ideas. This will be found to apply more 
 especially to certain phrases in the sacred writings, 
 which in the lapse of centuries, and through the 
 teaching of theologians, have acquired conventional 
 meanings that, there is reason to believe, were not 
 intended by the writer. It is obvious, there fort, 
 that, although a confession of faith constructed of 
 Scriptural phrases must necessarily be accepted by 
 all who believe the Scriptures, yet it may not convey 
 
 1 Works of G. F., IV. 3. Epistle of G. Whitehead and others. 
 
8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to all persons the same meaning, because all have 
 not received the same mental training. 
 
 There are, in the writings of the early Friends, 
 many passages that explain the sense in which they 
 understood the Scripture texts they employed, and 
 they often avowed very unpopular doctrines, for in 
 many points, both of doctrine and practice, they 
 were far in advance of the age in which they lived. 
 
 It is well known that at the rise of the Society, 
 and for a long time afterwards, they were violently 
 assailed from the pulpit and the press, and charged 
 with denying some of the doctrines deemed funda- 
 mental by the Orthodox churches. William Penn, 
 George Whitehead, and other Friends, were engaged 
 in public disputes with Dissenting ministers, among 
 whom were Vincent, Ives, Hicks, and Baxter. The 
 Friends were doubtless calumniated and charged 
 with false doctrines which they did not hold ; but 
 there can be no question that in many particulars 
 they differed from most other Dissenters, as well as 
 from the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholics. 
 
 In order to show precisely where they stood, and 
 what they believed, it is deemed appropriate to com- 
 pare the doctrines of Friends with the popular the- 
 ology of that day, first showing wherein they differed 
 from others, and then demonstrating from their 
 writings and from the Scriptures, that they held the 
 doctrines taught by Christ and his apostles. This 
 course is deemed the more necessary, inasmuch as 
 attempts have been made, by some claiming to be 
 their successors, to show that they did not differ in 
 essentials from the Trinitarian churches, and copious 
 
INTRODUCTION". 9 
 
 extracts from Friends' writings have been published, 
 which being entirely one-sided, are calculated to 
 mislead the public. It may be said of their writ- 
 ings, as of all other voluminous works, that passages 
 may be selected which, separated from the context, 
 do not express the author's meaning. It is the duty 
 and pleasure of a candid inquirer to collate such 
 passages as appear to be ambiguous, with others 
 that are more clear, and thus by patient and impar- 
 tial investigation endeavor to arrive at the truth. 
 
 While instituting a comparison between the doc- 
 trines held by Protestants generally, and those 
 maintained by the early Friends, it will be observed 
 that only those doctrines which have been subjects 
 of controversy among Friends in America are con- 
 sidered as being within the scope of this inquiry. 
 
 P2 
 
10 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS COMPARED WITH 
 THE POPULAR THEOLOGY ON IMMEDIATE REVE- 
 LATION. 
 
 § 1. The indwelling presence of the Divine Word, 
 or Spirit of Christ, in the souls of men, is the funda- 
 mental principle of the Society of Friends. u The 
 principle of the Quakers," wrote George Fox to the 
 king, " is the Spirit of Christ, who died for us, and 
 is risen for our justification; by which we know we 
 are his. He dwelleth in us by his Spirit, and by 
 the Spirit of Christ we are led out of unrighteous- 
 ness and ungodliness." * 
 
 § 2. "Now observe," says Pennington, in his trea 
 tise addressed to the Royal Society, " the difference 
 between the religion that God hath taught us, and 
 led us into, and the religions of all men upon the 
 earth besides. Our religion stands wholly out of 
 that, which all their religion stands in. Their reli- 
 gion stands in the comprehension, in a belief of a 
 literal relation or description. Our religion stands 
 in a principle which changeth the mind, wherein the 
 spirit of life appeareth to, and witnesseth in the 
 conscience to and concerning the things of the king- 
 dom ; where we hear the voice, and see the express 
 image of the invisible one, and know things not 
 from an outward relation, but from their inward 
 
 1 Works of G. F., Vol. II. p. 163. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAELY FRIENDS. 11 
 
 nature, virtue and power. Yea, here, we must pro- 
 fess, we so know things that we are fully satisfied 
 about them, and could not doubt concerning them, 
 though there never had been word or letter written 
 of them ; though indeed it is also a great comfort 
 and sweet refreshment to us, to read that testified 
 of outwardly, which, through the tender mercy of 
 our God, we enjoy inwardly. And in this our whole 
 religion consists ; to wit, in the silence and death of 
 the flesh, and in the quickening and flowing life of 
 the spirit. For he who is of the new birth, of the 
 new creation, of the second Adam, (the Lord from 
 heaven,) is as really alive to God, and as really lives 
 to him in his spirit, as ever he was really dead in 
 trespasses and sins, in the time of his alienation and 
 estrangement from God." 1 
 
 This passage was published in 1668, a few years 
 subsequent to the restoration of the Stuarts ; when 
 religion in England was at a low ebb, the established 
 Church resting in a state of lifeless formality, and 
 the Puritan sects, in their practice, having sunk far 
 below their profession. There were, doubtless, 
 throughout Europe, both among the Catholics and 
 Protestants, many devout souls who had seen beyond 
 the rituals of their church, and attained to that 
 "life which is hid with Christ in God;" neverthe- 
 less the language of Pennington was applicable to 
 Christian professors in general; their religion "stood 
 in the comprehension," — in an effort of the mind 
 to understand Scriptural truth, without having it 
 
 - _| LI 
 
 1 Works of I. P., II. 59. 
 
12 VIEWS OF THE EAELY FKIENDS. 
 
 verified in their own experience, through the teach- 
 ing of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 § 3. Robert Barclay states the doctrine of imme- 
 diate revelation in this proposition. " Seeing no 
 man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to 
 whom the Son revealeth him ; Matt. xi. 27. And 
 seeing the revelation of the Son is in and by the 
 Spirit, therefore the testimony of the Spirit is 
 that alone by which the true knowledge of God 
 hath been, is, and can be only revealed." "It is 
 very probable," he says, "that many carnal 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 gen- 
 erality of Christians apostatized and degenerated, 
 that, though there be not anything more plainly 
 asserted, more seriously recommended, nor more 
 certainly attested to in all the writings of the Holy 
 Scriptures, yet nothing is less minded and 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 ever judged Christians, but such as 
 had the Spirit of Christ; Rom. viii. 9. But now 
 many do boldly call themselves Christians, w T ho 
 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, who were led 
 by the Spirit of God; ibid., verse 14; but now, many 
 aver themselves sons of God, who know nothing 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 13 
 
 of this leader: and he that affirms himself so led, is 
 by the pretended orthodox of this age, presently 
 proclaimed a heretic. 
 
 "For the better understanding of this proposition, 
 we do distinguish betwixt the certain knowledge of 
 God, and the uncertain ; betwixt the spiritual knowl- 
 edge, and the literal ; the saving heart-knowledge, 
 and soaring airy head-knowledge. The last we con- 
 fess may be divers ways obtained ; but the first by 
 no other way than the inward immediate manifesta- 
 tion and revelation of God's Spirit, shining in and 
 upon the heart, enlightening and opening the under- 
 standing." ■ 
 
 § 4. In confirmation of this doctrine, Barclay 
 quotes from the works of Augustine, Clemens Alex- 
 andrinus, and others of the early Christian writers, 
 and also from Luther and Melancthon, showing that 
 the saving knowledge of God can only be derived 
 from the teachings of his own spirit. He might 
 have quoted similar doctrines from the early re- 
 formers in England, — the fathers of the Anglican 
 Church, — as well as from Baxter, Bunyan and others 
 then living, who were the opposers of Friends. 
 
 The difference between the Friends and most 
 others, in relation to this doctrine, may be briefly 
 stated as follows : 
 
 § 5. In the Church of England, the doctrine of the 
 Holy Spirit's influence on the heart was recognized 
 la her Liturgy and taught in her Homilies ; but in 
 the ministrations of her priesthood it was little 
 
 1 Barclay's Apology, Prop. 2, \ 1. 
 
1-i VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 regarded, if not wholly ignored; while among the 
 Puritan ministers, who were generally Calvinists, 
 the gifts of the Spirit were supposed to be confined 
 to the elect, for whom alone, they asserted, Christ 
 died. It was generally taught by both classes, that 
 immediate revelation had cease<J, aud that the Holy 
 Spirit as an enlightener and sanctifier was only wit- 
 nessed through the use of the means of grace, such 
 as reading the Scriptures, partaking of the ordi- 
 nances, and attending on the services of religion. 
 One of the opponents of Friends, a vicar in the 
 established church, wrote as follows : " God has 
 committed his will now wholly to writing, so that 
 former ways of God's revealing his will, as by im- 
 mediate revelation, are now ceased, and the Scrip- 
 ture is a fixed canon or rule, — and our sole and 
 entire rule of faith and manners, in all that is neces- 
 sary to our salvntion." 1 
 
 § G. In the Society of Friends, "the Universal 
 and Saving Light of Christ" was held forth con- 
 tinually as their fundamental principle, — the corner- 
 stone of their religion. Xot only to those who have 
 the Scriptures, or the historical knowledge of Christ's 
 advent, does his spirit come ; but even to the hea- 
 then who are sitting in darkness, his light appears. 
 He comes as the Spirit of Truth, " to convince the 
 world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judg- 
 ment." To the wicked, he appears as a reprover 
 for sin, "a spirit of judgment, and a spirit of burn- 
 ing;" but to the humble, obedient soul, as a com- 
 forter in righteousness. 
 
 1 Patrick Smith, quoted in Besse's Defence of Quakerism, p. 36. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 15 
 
 § 7. In the brief account we have, in Genesis, of 
 the primogenitors of our race, it appears that not 
 only while they were in a state of innocence did 
 the Lord hold converse with them, but after their 
 transgression they heard his voice, saying, " Adam, 
 where art thou?" With Cain also he conversed, 
 both before and after the murder of his brother : in 
 the first instance, showing him that his acceptance 
 depended upon well-doing ; in the second condemn- 
 in o; him for the crime he had committed. In these 
 cases the Eternal Word or Spirit of Christ spoke 
 immediately to the human soul, — no outward instru- 
 ment was employed ; and such is still the ordinary 
 process by which the divine will is made known to 
 man, — it is therefore called immediate revelation. 
 It is true, that in the ordering of Divine Providence, 
 instrumental means are often employed, such as the 
 Scriptures of truth, the preaching of the gospel, and 
 the vicissitudes of life ; but in all cases, the good 
 effected is from the immediate operation of divine 
 grace upon the heart or conscience. 
 
 In fact, there can be no saving knowledge of 
 Christ, but from immediate revelation. "No man 
 can come to me," said Jesus, "except the Father 
 which hath sent me draw him." ■ This drawing of 
 the Father is the operation of his spirit, for "the 
 manifestation of the spirit is given to every man to 
 profit withal." 2 As the power and virtue of the 
 outward sun can only be known through his light, 
 and as no description of light can give an idea of it 
 without the sense of vision, so the Author of all 
 
 1 John vi. 44. a 1 Cor. xii. 7. 
 
16 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 Good — the sun of the spiritual world — can only 
 be known through the influence of his light, or 
 spirit, immediately revealed to our spiritual per- 
 ception. 
 
 § 8. In the writings of Friends there is a clear 
 distinction observed between the Divine li^ht which 
 is the medium, and the conscience which is the 
 organ, of spiritual perception. This faculty of the 
 soul may be clouded by prejudice, benumbed by 
 disobedience, and "even seared as with a hot iron," 
 by long-continued transgression ; but the light itself, 
 though obscured, or lost to our vision, remains ever 
 the same, for the Divine nature is unchangeable. 
 "If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be 
 full of light ; but if thine eye be evil [or diseased], 
 thy whole body shall be full of darkness." 
 
 William Penn, in treating of this subject, adopts 
 the language of Justin Martyr, viz. : " God hath built 
 to himself a natural temple in the consciences of men 
 as the place wherein he would be worshipped; and 
 it is there men ought to look for his appearance and 
 reverence and worship him." He quotes also the fol- 
 lowing passage from Clemens Alexandrinus: "It is the 
 voice of Truth, that light will shine out of darkness. 
 Therefore doth it shine in the hidden part of man- 
 kind, that is, in the heart ; and the rays of knowl- 
 edge break forth making manifest and shining upon 
 the inward man, which is hidden; — Christ's inti- 
 mates and co-heirs are the disciples of the Light." 1 
 
 Robert Barclay, in his treatise on Universal Love, 
 relates, on the testimony of Francis Xavier, called 
 
 1 Penn's Select Works, p. 245. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 17 
 
 by the Catholics the Apostle of the Indies, that the 
 Japanese, whom the Jesuits endeavored to proselyte, 
 made objections to the Catholic doctrines, saving 
 that God seemed not to be merciful and just in con- 
 demning to eternal punishment all the Japanese 
 who died before the coming of the missionaries. 
 To remove this objection and gain converts, the 
 Jesuits assured them that all men have the knowl- 
 edge of the divine laws from nature, and from God 
 the Author of nature, — this law was implanted in 
 man's heart before any human laws were made. 
 
 Thus says Barclay, " To satisfy these Japanese, 
 that their forefathers were not all necessarily damned, 
 and to show that the universal love of God reached 
 unto them to put them in a capacity of salvation, 
 this cunning Jesuit could not find any other way 
 than by asserting this principle," 1 — the Light and 
 Life of God in the soul. 
 
 George F«>x says in his Journal: "I was sent to 
 turn people from darkness to the light, that they 
 might receive Christ Jesus, for to as many as should 
 receive him in his light, I saw that he would give 
 power to become the sons of God, which I had 
 obtained by receiving Christ And I was to direct 
 people to the spirit that gave forth the Scriptures by 
 which they might be led into all truth, and so up to 
 Christ and God as they had been who gave them 
 forth." 2 
 
 Such was the truly liberal doctrine held forth by 
 the first preachers and writers in the Society of 
 
 1 Barclay's Works, p. 701. 
 
 2 G. F's. Journal. London ed. 1G94. 
 2* Q 
 
18 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 Friends, a doctrine that was then assailed on every 
 hand by the pulpit and the press — by Churchmen 
 and Dissenters. 
 
 This doctrine, when held in sincerity by enlight- 
 ened minds, necessarily leads to toleration and reli- 
 gious liberty ; for if we believe that those who have 
 not so much as heard of the coming of Christ in the 
 flesh, may nevertheless be saved by obedience to the 
 Light or Spirit of Christ, the conclusion logically 
 follows, that the same divine power will save those 
 professed followers of Christ who obey his spiritual 
 law, although, in our apprehension, they may err in 
 judgment concerning some important points of 
 doctrine. 
 
 Accordingly we find that religious liberty was 
 cherished by the early Friends, and consistently 
 carried out in their practice when they attained to 
 power in some of the American colonies. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS COMPARED WITH 
 THE POPULAR THEOLOGY OX THE HOLY SCRIP- 
 TURES. 
 
 § 1. The first imprisonment of George Fox re- 
 sulted from his controverting the views generally 
 entertained concerning the Seriptures. In the year 
 1G40, he went into the parish house of worship at 
 Nottingham, where he heard the priest take for his 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 19 
 
 text these words of Peter: ""We have also a more 
 sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that 
 ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark 
 place until the day dawn and the day-star arise 
 in your hearts." This, he told the people, was the 
 Scriptures, by which they were to try all doctrines, 
 religions, and opinions. 
 
 <k Xow the Lord's power," writes George Fox, 
 "was so mighty upon me and so strong in me, that 
 I could not hold, but was made to cry out, 'Oh! no, 
 it is not the Scriptures;' and told them what it was, 
 namely, the Holy Spirit by which the holy men of 
 God gave forth the Scriptures, whereby opinions, 
 religions, and judgments were to be tried; for it 
 led into all truth, and so gave the knowledge of all 
 truth. For the Jews had the Scriptures, yet resisted 
 the Holy Ghost and rejected Christ, the bright 
 morning-star, and persecuted Christ and his apostles, 
 and took upon them to try their doctrines by the 
 Scriptures, but erred in judgment and did not try 
 them aright, becaU8e they tried them without the 
 Holy Ghost." 
 
 The early Friends avowed their belief in the au- 
 thenticity and divine authority of the Scriptures, 
 but they declined to give them the usual appella- 
 tion, — the Word of God, — because this title is, by 
 the sacred writers, appropriated to Christ the Eter- 
 nal Word, that was in the beginning with God and 
 was God. 
 
 § 2. The views expressed by Barclay in the third 
 proposition of his Apology, were tinse generally 
 held by the Society, viz : — 
 
20 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 "From these revelations of the Spirit of God to 
 the saints have proceeded the Scriptures of Truth, 
 which contain : I. A faithful historical account of 
 the actings of God's people in divers ages ; with 
 many singular and remarkable providences attend- 
 ing them. II. A prophetical account of several 
 things, whereof some are already past, and some yet 
 to come. III. A full and ample account of all the 
 chief principles of the doctrine of Christ, held forth 
 in divers precious declarations, exhortations, and 
 sentences, which hy the moving of God's Spirit, 
 were at several times and upon sundry occasions 
 written unto some churches and their pastors. 
 Nevertheless because they are only a declaration of 
 the fountain, and not the fountain itself, therefore 
 tlicy are not to be esteemed the principal ground of 
 all truth and knowledge, nor yet the adequate, pri- 
 mary rule of faith and manners. Yet because they 
 give a true and faithful testimony of the first foun- 
 dation, 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 testily, that the Spirit is that 
 guide by which the saints are led into all truth; 
 therefore, according to the Scriptures, the Spirit is 
 the first and principal leader." 1 * * * * " The prin- 
 cipal rule of Christians under the gospel is not an 
 outward letter, nor law outwardly written and de- 
 livered, hut an inward spiritual law ingraven in the 
 heart, the law of the Spirit of life, the word that is 
 nisrh in the heart and in the mouth; but the letter 
 
 1 John xvi. 13 ; Rom. vii. 14. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 21 
 
 of the Scripture is outward, of itself a dead thing, 
 a mere declaration of good things but not the things 
 themselves: therefore it nor is, nor can be, the chief 
 or principal rule of Christians." 
 
 He says moreover of the Scriptures : " The propo- 
 sition itself declares how much I esteem them ; 
 and provided that to the Spirit (from which they 
 came) be but granted that place the Scriptures them- 
 selves give it; I do freely concede to the Scriptures 
 the second place, even whatsoever they say of them- 
 selves, which the apostle Paul chiefly mentions in 
 two places. Bom. xv. 4 : 'Whatsoever things were 
 written aforetime, were written for our learning, 
 that we through patience and comfort of the Scrip- 
 tures might have hope.' 2 Tim. iii. 15, 17: 'The 
 Holy Scriptures are able to make wise unto salva- 
 tion, through faith which is in Christ Jesus.' * * * * 
 'All Scripture given by inspiration of God, is pro- 
 fitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for 
 instruction in righteousness, that the man of God 
 may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto every 
 good work.'" * * * * " Moreover because they are 
 commonly acknowledged by all to have been writ- 
 ten by the dictates of the Holy Spirit, and that the 
 errors which may be supposed by the injury of time 
 to have slipped in, are not such, but that there is a 
 sufficient clear testimony left to all the essentials of 
 the Christian faith, we do look upon them as the 
 only fit outward judge of controversy among Chris- 
 tians, and that whatsoever doctrine is contrary unto 
 their testimony may therefore justly be rejected as 
 false." 1 
 
 — - - 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. 3. H v. and vi. 
 
22 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIEXDS COMPARED WITH 
 THE POPULAR THEOLOGY ON THE ORIGINAL AND 
 PRESENT STATE OF MAN. 
 
 § 1. The doctrine of Original Sin, as generally 
 held, is thus defined by one of its advocates: 1 
 " Original sin was the rebellion of the first man, 
 Adam, against his Creator, which was a sin of uni- 
 versal efficacy, which derives a guilt and stain to 
 mankind in all a^cs of the world. The account the 
 Scripture gives of it, is grounded on the relation 
 which all men have to Adam as their natural and 
 moral principal or head." * * * * " As the whole 
 race of mankind was virtually in Adams loins, so it 
 was presumed to give virtual consent to what he 
 did ; when he broke, all suffered shipwreck that 
 were contained in him as their natural original." 
 * * * * "In the first treaty between God and man, 
 Adam was considered not as a single person, but as 
 the representative of a nation and contracted for all 
 his descendants by ordinary generation. Ilis person 
 was the fountain of theirs, and his will the representa- 
 tive of theirs. From hence his vast progeny became a 
 part)/ in the covenant, and had a title to the benefits 
 contained in it upon his obedience, and was liable 
 to the curse upon his violation of it." 2 
 
 § 2. Such is the doctrine of original sin, which 
 
 1 Cruden's Concordance. a Ibid. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 23 
 
 Robert Barclay iu his Apology calls an " invented 
 and unscriptural barbarism." 1 
 
 The notion that all men were virtually in Adan 
 and gave their consent to what he did, is an ab- 
 surdity that must be obvious to the lowest capacity*. 
 No sane person will pretend to assert, that a man is 
 morally responsible for the guilty transactions of his 
 father, his grandfather, or any of his ancestors. As to 
 the first treaty between man and his Maker, in which 
 Adam contracted for all his descendants, it is a fiction 
 which has no foundation in Scripture or reason. 
 
 The imputation of sin to infants is denied and 
 disproved by Barclay, in the following language : 
 "The Apostle saith plainly, Rom. iv. 15, 'Where no 
 law is there is no transgression.' And again, v. 13, 
 'But sin is not imputed where there is no law,' 
 than which testimonies there is nothing more posi- 
 tive ; since to infants there is no law, seeing as such 
 they are utterly incapable of it; the law cannot reach 
 any but such as have in some measure less or more the 
 exercise of their understanding which infants have 
 not." * * * * " Secondly, What can be more posi- 
 tive than that of Ezek. xviii. 20, 'The soul that sin- 
 neth it shall die : the son shall not bear the father's 
 iniquity' ? For the prophet here first showeth what 
 is the cause of man's eternal death, which he saith 
 is his sinning, and then, as if he proposed expressly 
 to shut out such an opinion, he assures us, ' The son 
 shall not bear the father's iniquity.' From which I 
 thus argue : If the son bear not the iniquity of his 
 
 * *■ i ■ i ■ ■ 
 
 1 Barclay's Apology, Phila. ed. 1789, p. 108. 
 
24 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 father, or of his immediate parents, far less shall he 
 hear the iniquity of Adam." ' 
 
 § 3. It must not be inferred, however, that Bar- 
 clay attributed no evil consequences to mankind 
 from the sin of Adam. " Through him," he says, 
 " there is a seed of sin propagated to all men, which 
 in its own nature is sinful and inclines men to 
 iniquity; yet it will not follow from thence, that 
 infants, who join not with this seed, are guilty." 
 Again he writes : " All Adam's posterity, or man- 
 kind, both Jews and Gentiles, as to the first Adam 
 or earthly man, is fallen, degenerated and dead ; 
 deprived of the sensation or feeling of this inward 
 testimony or seed of God, and is subject unto the 
 power, nature and seed of the serpent which he 
 sowcth in men's hearts, while they abide in this 
 natural and corrupted state: from whence it comes 
 that not only their works and deeds, but all their 
 imaginations are evil perpetually in the sight of God 
 as proceeding from this depraved and wicked seed. 
 Man therefore, as he is in this state, can know noth- 
 ing aright ; yea, his thoughts and conceptions con- 
 cerning God and things spiritual, until he be dis- 
 joined from this evil seed and united to the Divine 
 Light, are unprofitable both to himself and others." 2 
 
 Some of the writers among the early Friends refer 
 to the fall of Adam in such language as would lead 
 us to infer that in their opinion mankind have de- 
 rived some taint or propensity to sin from their pro- 
 genitors. Thus George Fox writes, in relation to 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. IV., g 4. a Apology, Prop. IV. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 25 
 
 Adam and Eve, " Thinking to be made wise, they 
 became fools, which brought the rod upon the back 
 of them, which also comes upon all their posterity 
 in the fall." » 
 
 And Isaac Pennington says: "The wound of man 
 is deep by the fall : he hath really lost God, he is 
 shut out of his commonwealth ; yea, in that estate 
 he is altogether without hope (for the hope springs 
 from God's visitation of him with his light, and 
 from the living promise.) " 2 
 
 These expressions, and many others of a similar 
 character, will however admit of another construc- 
 tion ; they may have been applied to the general 
 corruption of mankind resulting from actual trans- 
 gression, for all who have lost their innocence 
 through disobedience to the divine law, are in a 
 fallen state; and even those who are least defiled 
 must be born again "by the incorruptible seed and 
 word of God," before they can enter the kingdom 
 of heaven. 
 
 4. In a work published in 1GT8, called the "Xew 
 England Fire-brand Quenched," written by G. Fox 
 and John Burnyeat, we find the following question 
 and answer addressed to Roger AVilliams. " Thou 
 sayest these rotten and crooked dispositions in 
 every child bring forth wild asses fruit in youth. 
 Wherein did Jeremiah and John Baptist or such 
 as were clean and sanctified in the womb bring forth 
 such fruits as thou speakest of?" * * * * '-AH 
 these Scriptures do not prove that Jeremiah and 
 
 1 G. Fox, Doctrinals, 723. Work's Am. ed., VI. 9. 
 a Pennington's Works, I. 339. 
 IV— 3 
 
26 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 John, that were sanctified in the womb, and the 
 children that Paul speaketh of (Cor. vii., that he 
 said were hohj), that they were conceived in sin and 
 brought forth in iniquity, because David said, he 
 was.'" 
 
 § 5. The early experience of Fox, Howgill, Pen- 
 nington, and Burrough were very remarkable, and 
 seem to have been related in great simplicity, with- 
 out reference to popular theology. G. Fox writes 
 in his Journal: "When I came to eleven years of 
 age, I knew pureness and righteousness ; for while I 
 ivas a child I was taught how to walk so as to keep 
 pure. The Lord taught me to be faithful in all 
 things, and to act faithfully two ways, viz., inwardly 
 to God, and outwardly to man ; and to keep to yea 
 and nay in all things." 
 
 And William Penn writes of Fox, that " from a 
 child he appeared of another frame of mind than 
 the rest of his brethren ; being more religious, in- 
 ward, still, solid and observing beyond his years." 2 
 
 Francis Howgill, who died a martyr in Appleby 
 
 jail, said just before his death: "I have sought the 
 
 way of the Lord from a child, and lived innocently 
 
 as among men ; and if any inquire after my latter 
 
 end, let them know that I die in the faith that I 
 
 lived in and suffered for." 
 
 Isaac Penniii2;tou, in his "Brief Account of his 
 9 
 Soul's Travel" says: " My heart from my childhood 
 
 was pointed towards the Lord, whom I feared and 
 
 longed after from my tender years, wherein I felt 
 
 1 Part II., p. 136. 2 Preface to Journal of G. F., p. 29. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 27 
 
 that I could not be satisfied with (nor indeed seek 
 after) the things of this perishing world, which 
 naturally pass away ; but I desired the true sense of, 
 and unity with, that which abideth forever. There 
 was somewhat indeed then still within me (even the 
 reed of eternity) which leavened and balanced my 
 spirit almost continually; but I knew it not dis- 
 tinctly, so as to turn to it and give up to it, entirely 
 and understandinffly." ■ 
 
 William Penn, after referring to the deep religious 
 exercises of Isaac Pennington, thus continues: "Eor 
 did this sorrow flow from a sense of former vice, for 
 he was virtuous from his childhood, but with holy 
 Habakkuk from the dread he had of the majesty of 
 God, and his desire to find a resting-place in the 
 great day of trouble." 2 
 
 Edward Burrough, who died in Newgate prison, 
 a martyr for the testimony of truth, in the 28th 
 year of his age, was a remarkable example of early 
 piety. It is said in the notice of him, in "Piety Pro- 
 moted," that he "was in his childhood ripe in knowl- 
 edge and did far excel many of his years. Gray 
 hairs were upon him when but a youth, and he was 
 inclined to the best things and the nearest way of 
 worship, according to the Scriptures, accompanying 
 the best men." In his last sickness, "he was in 
 prayer often, both day and night, saying at one time, 
 'I have had a testimony of the Lord's love to me 
 from my youth, and my heart hath been given up to 
 do his will. I have preached the gospel freely in 
 
 1 Works of I. P., II. 49. 2 Works of I. P., Vol. I. 
 
28 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 this city, and have often given up my life for the 
 gospel's sake. Lord, rip open my heart anc 1 see 
 if it be not right before thee.' Another time he 
 said, 'There lies no iniquity at my door, but the 
 presence of the Lord is with me, and his life, 1 feel, 
 justifies me.' Afterwards he said to the Lord, 
 1 Thou hast loved me when I was in the womb, and 
 I have loved thee from my -cradle and from my youth 
 unto this day, and have served thee faithfully in my 
 generation.' " s 
 
 § 6. These passages, selected from works that have 
 always been considered standards in the Society, 
 show that the early Friends did not believe in the 
 inherent depravity of man. They were not troubled 
 by the dogmas of theology, and when they came to 
 die they spoke out freely the earnest convictions of 
 their souls. They knew and acknowledged, that 
 the natural propensities of man, if not controlled by 
 divine grace, will lead to sin; but sin cannot be in- 
 herent, for it is " the transgression of the law." The 
 divine master said of the Jews, "If I had not come 
 And spoken unto them, they had not had sin." So it 
 is now; we are not sinners by birth, but become so 
 when we disobey his law written in our hearts. 
 
 To the unprejudiced mind that confides in the 
 testimony of Jesus Christ, there can be no hesita- 
 tion in believing that infants are in a state of inno- 
 cence, for "Of such," he said, "is the kingdom of 
 God;" and "in heaven their angels do always be- 
 hold the face of my Father." 
 
 1 Piety* Promoted, Pliila. ed., 1854. Vol. I. p. 51. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 29 
 
 § 7. Another feature in the hideous doctrine of 
 original sin remains to be considered. The doctors 
 of theology not only asserted, in relation to the lust 
 of the flesh, derived, as they said, from Adam's 
 transgression, that "in every person born into this 
 world it deserveth God's wrath and damnation ;" 
 but they maintained, moreover, that " This infection 
 of nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regen- 
 erate, whereby the flesh lusteth always contrary to 
 the Spirit." 1 
 
 § 8. This doctrine was rejected by the Friends, 
 and was one of the prominent points of controversy 
 between them and their adversaries. "The Protes- 
 tant priests, ministers, and teachers," writes George 
 Fox, "preach to the people and teach them both in 
 public and private, that they must carry a body of 
 sin and a body of death, as long as they live on this 
 side the grave; and none can be made free from sin 
 and this body of death as long as they live upon the 
 earth." 2 This doctrine he utterly denies and calls 
 it "preaching sin for term of life." 
 
 "And again," he says, "Satan's messengers and 
 ministers say, 'Paul cried out and said, "0 wretched 
 man that I am ! who shall deliver me from the body 
 of this death ? " And he was in a warfare, and there- 
 fore people must be in a warfare and carry a body 
 of death and a body of sin about them as long as 
 they live, to the grave, and there is no overcoming 
 nor victory here.' But in this, Satan's messengers 
 
 1 Articles of Church of England ; Revised by Westminster 
 Assembly. Neal's Hist, of Puritans, II. 456. 
 
 2 Works of G. F.. VI. 436. 
 
 3* IV — R 
 
30 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 and ministers wrong the apostle's words, and do not 
 take them all ; for though he cried out, who shall 
 deliver him from that body of death and sin, yet he 
 thanks God through Jesus Christ our Lord, and 
 saith, 'The law of the Spirit of life which is in 
 Christ Jesus, hath made me free from the laws of 
 sin and death."' * * * * "There is no condemna- 
 tion to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not 
 after the flesh, but after the Spirit," * * * * 
 "Thanks be to God who hath given us the victory 
 through our Lord Jesus Christ." * * * * "They 
 that be in Christ arc new creatures." 1 
 
 In his Journal, George Fox thus speaks of the 
 joy and peace that succeeded his deep trials and 
 mental conflict-: "Now was I come up in Spirit 
 through the flaming sword into the paradise of God. 
 All things were new, and all the creation gave 
 another smell unto me than before, bevond what 
 words can utter. I knew nothing but purene . 
 innocence, and righteousness, bring renewed up 
 into the imau'c of God by Christ Jesus; so that I 
 was come up to the state of Adam, which he was 
 in before the fall." * * * * "But I was immedi- 
 ately taken up in spirit to sec another or more stead- 
 fast state than Adam's in innocency, even into a 
 state in Christ Jesus, that should never fall." 2 
 
 § 9. The doctrine of Perfection, as held by the 
 early Friends, is thus laid down by Esaac Penning- 
 ton. "That the Lord God is able perfectly to re- 
 deem from sin in tins lite ; that he can cast out the 
 
 1 Works of G. F., VI. 442. 
 
 3 Journal of G. F. New York, 1800. 1.21,22. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 31 
 
 strong man, cleanse the house, and make it fit for 
 himself to dwell in ; that he can finish transgression 
 and sin in the heart, and brins: in everlasting right- 
 eousness ; that he can tread down Satan under the 
 feet of his saints, and make them more than con- 
 querors over him ; this, they confess, they steadily 
 believe. But that every one that is turned to the 
 light of the Spirit of Christ in his heart, is presently 
 advanced to this state, they never held forth; but 
 that the way is long, the travel hard, the enemies 
 and difficulties many, and that there is need of much 
 faith, hope, patience, repentance, watchfulness against 
 temptations, &c, before the life in them arrive at 
 such a pitch. Yet, for all this, saitli Christ to his dis- 
 ciples, 'Be ye perfect;' directing them to aim at such 
 a thing: and the apostle saitli, 'Let us go on unto 
 perfection;' and Christ gave n ministry 'for the por- 
 ting of the saints:' and they do not doubt but 
 that he that begins the work, can perfect it even in 
 this life, and so deliver them out of the hands of 
 sin, Satan, and all their spiritual enemies, as that they 
 may Berve God without fear of them any more, in 
 holiness and righteousness before him all the days 
 of their lives." 1 
 
 § 10. George Fox, when examined by the magis- 
 trates at Derby, was asked, "Are you sanctified?" 
 "Yes," he said, "I am in the paradise of God." 
 "Have you no sin?" "Christ my Saviour hath 
 taken away my sin, and in him there is no sin." 
 "How do you know that Christ abides in you?" 
 
 1 Works of I. P., I. 2G9. 
 
32 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 " By his Spirit that lie hath given me." "Are any 
 of you Christ?" "Nay," he replied, "we are 
 nothing, Christ is all." 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS COMPARED WITH 
 THE POPULAR THEOLOGY OX THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 The doctrine of the Trinity is thus defined in the 
 articles of the Church of England, revised by the 
 Assembly of divines at Westminster in the year 1643. 
 
 "There is but one living and true God, everlast- 
 ing, without body, parts, or passions ; of infinite 
 power, wisdom, and goodness, the maker and pro- 
 server of all things, both visible and invisible. And 
 in unity of this Godhead there be three j)crsons of 
 one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the 
 Son, and the Holy Ghost. The Son which is the 
 Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of 
 the Father, the very and eternal God, of one sub- 
 stance with the Father, took man's nature in the 
 womb of the blessed virgin, of her substance, so 
 that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say 
 the Godhead and the manhood, were joined together 
 in one person never to be divided, whereof is one 
 Christ, very God and very man." 1 * * * * 
 
 § 2. The commonly received doctrine of the Tri- 
 nity was rejected by the early Friends. George 
 
 1 Neal's Hist, of Puritans, II. 454. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 33 
 
 Pox, in reply to Christopher Wade, who had asserted 
 that the Holy Ghost is a person and that there was 
 a Trinity of three persons before Christ was born, 
 says : " Thou knowest not him that is in the Father 
 and the Father in him, glorified with the Father 
 "before the world began. And the Scriptures do not 
 tell people of a trinity, nor three persons, but the 
 common-prayer mass book speaks of three persons, 
 brought in by thy father the pope, and the Father, 
 Bon, and Holy Spirit was always one." 1 
 
 Priest Ferguson having asserted that "Christ and 
 the Father, and the Holy Ghost, are not one ; but 
 they are three, therefore distinct," G. Fox replies: 
 "This is the denying of Christ's doctrine, who said, 
 'I and my Father are one,' and the Holy Ghost pro- 
 ceeds from the Father and the Son, and he was con- 
 ceived by the Holy Ghost, and they are all one, not 
 distinct, but one in unity, that which comes out from 
 him, leads the saints into all truth, (that ever was 
 giveu forth from the Spirit of Truth,) and so up to 
 the Father of truth, and so goes back again from 
 whence it came." 2 
 
 Stephen Crisp, in his "Description of the Church 
 of Scotland," says: "The doctrines of your church 
 also are reprovable and corrupt in many things, 
 contrary to the Scriptures. And first in your doc- 
 trines of God, whom you say is to be known and 
 believed on as in the distinguishment of three per- 
 sons; and herein ye teach contrary to the scriptures 
 
 1 Great Mystery, 246 ; and Works of G. F., III. 307. 
 8 G. F. Great Mystery, p. 293 ; and Works, III. 463. 
 
 R2 
 
34 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 of truth, which ye say is your rule, and by it are all 
 such dreamers and deceivers judged, and by the 
 spirit which gave them forth, which speaks nowhere 
 of three persons, as ye imagine and teach, but de- 
 clares of the only wise God, who is one in his being 
 and subsistence, individual, infinite; who divideth 
 all things and to every sort their portion; who lim- 
 iteth all things and is not limited; whose power and 
 spirit is inseparable from him, who is the Father of 
 the spirits of all flesh, who by his power createth 
 and by his spirit quiekenetk all living creatures; 
 wJiose power is the Christ, and whose spirit is the holy 
 and eternal life which the}' partake of who wait for 
 his appearance in his power. And these doth not 
 the Scriptures call three persons, but the one witness 
 in the Heaven, which you arc all ignorant of who 
 dream and divine to the people of a distinguishment 
 of persons in the Godhead." 1 
 
 In relation to "The Trinity of distinct and sepa- 
 rate persons in the unity of essence," Wm. Penn 
 writes as follows: "It is requisite I should inform 
 thee, reader, concerning its original: thou mayst 
 assure thyself it is not from the Scriptures, nor 
 reason, since so expressly repugnant; although all 
 broachers of their own inventions strongly endeavor 
 to reconcile them with that holy record. Know then, 
 my friend, it was born above three hundred years 
 after the ancient gospel was declared, and that 
 through the nice distinctions and too daring curi- 
 osity of the bishop of Alexandria, who being as 
 
 S. Crisp's Works, p. 75. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 35 
 
 hotly opposed by Arius, their zeal so reciprocally 
 blew the fire of contention, animosity, and persecu- 
 tion, till at last they sacrificed each other to their 
 mutual revenge." * * * * "Be therefore cautioned, 
 reader, not to embrace the determination of preju- 
 diced councils for evangelical doctrine which the 
 Scriptures bear no certain testimony to ; neither was 
 believed by the primitive saints, or thus stated by 
 any I have read of in the first, second, or third cen- 
 turies; particularly Irenseus, Justin Martyr, Tertul- 
 lian, Origen, with many others who appear wholly 
 foreign to the matter in controversy." 
 
 After quoting many passages of Scripture show- 
 ing that God is one, and there is no other besides 
 Him, he thus proceeds: "If God, as the Scriptures 
 testify, hath never been declared or believed, but as 
 the Holy One, then will it follow, that God is not an 
 holy three, nor doth subsist in three distinct and 
 separate Holy Ones." 1 
 
 From the conclusion of the same work, the fol- 
 lowing passage is quoted:- — "Mistake me not, we 
 never have disowned a Father, Word, and Spirit, 
 which are One, but man's inventions: For, 1. Their 
 Trinity has not so much as a foundation in the 
 Scriptures. 2. Its original was three hundred years 
 
 1 Sandy Foundation Shaken. This treatise is included in 
 Penn's Select Works published under the care of the London Meet- 
 ing for Sufferings in 1771. By a minute of London Yearly Meeting, 
 dated 17G8, the Meeting for Sufferings was desired to send to the 
 several counties, the new proposals laid before that meeting for 
 printing the selected parts of W. Penn's Works on larger paper 
 and better letter. 
 
36 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 after Christianity was in the world. 3. It having 
 cost much blood; in the council of Sirmium, Anno 
 355, it was decided that thenceforth the controversy 
 should not be remembered, because the Scriptures 
 of God make no mention thereof. "Why then should 
 it be mentioned now with a Maranatlia on all that 
 will not bow to this abstruse opinion? 4. And it 
 doubtless hath occasioned idolatry: witness the 
 popish images of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. 5. 
 It scandalizeth Jews, Turks, and Infidels, and pal- 
 pably obstructs their reception of the Christian 
 doctrine." 
 
 § 3. Such is William Penn's clear and decided 
 testimony against the doctrine of the Trinity, as 
 held by the Church of Rome, the Church of England, 
 and nearly all the Protestant sects; but in a later 
 work he acknowledges what he calls the "Scripture 
 Trinity." 1 It being charged that "the Quakers deny 
 the Trinity," he answers in these words : "Nothing 
 less. They believe in the Holy three, or Trinity 
 of Father, Word, and Spirit, according to Scripture. 
 And that these three arc truly and properly one : 
 of one nature as well as will; but they arc very 
 tender of quitting Scripture terms for schoolmen's ; 
 such as, 'distinct and separate persons,' and subsist- 
 ences, &c. are; from whence people arc apt to en- 
 tertain gross ideas and notions of the Father, Son, 
 and Holy Ghost." 
 
 In this passage he refers to the text 1 John v. 7 : 
 "There are three that bear record in heaven, the 
 
 1 The Key, Penn's Select Works, p. 682. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 37 
 
 Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these 
 three are one.'' This text is not found in the most 
 ancient Greek manuscripts extant, it is omitted in 
 Luther's translation of the Bible, it is inserted in 
 the early English translations, but with marks of 
 doubtfulness, and its genuineness is now considered 
 too doubtful to allow of its use in substantiating 
 Christian doctrine. 1 
 
 In the doctrinal writings of the early Friends 
 this text is often quoted, and a marked emphasis is 
 generally placed on the last clause, which they un- 
 derstood to mean that God is truly and properly one 
 Divine Being. 
 
 § 4. When the Act of toleration was about to be 
 passed in the reign of William and Mary, it con- 
 tained a clause extending its benefits to "All such 
 who profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus 
 Christ his Eternal Son, the true God, and in the 
 Holy Spirit, co-equal with the Father and the Son, 
 One God blessed forever: And do acknowledge 
 the Holy Scriptures of the Old and Xew Testament 
 to be the revealed will and word of God." 
 
 This confession being considered by Friends "un- 
 scriptural," George Whitehead and John Vaughton 
 presented to a committee of Parliament the follow- 
 ing substitute, which was adopted, viz. : "I profess 
 faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ his 
 eternal Son the true God, and in the Holy Spirit, 
 One God blessed forever; and do acknowledge the 
 Holy Scriptures of the Old and Xew Testament 
 to be given by Divine inspiration." 
 
 1 See Clark's Commentary. 
 
38 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 In relation to this confession of faith, George 
 Whitehead observes : "We were therefore of neces- 
 sity put upon offering the said confession, it being 
 also our known professed principle, sincerely to con- 
 fess Christ the Son of the living God, His divinity 
 and as he is the Eternal Word : and that the three 
 which bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word 
 and the Holy Ghost, are one: one divine Being, one 
 God blessed forever." l 
 
 It will be observed that the confession of faith 
 first proposed in the Bill before Parliament, con- 
 tained this expression, " The Holy Spirit co-equal 
 with the Father and the Son," — which seemed to 
 imply the distinct personality of the Holy Spirit, 
 and was not satisfactory to the Friends. They did 
 not admit of any such distinction ; but believed in 
 God as a Spirit, holy, wise and good, omniscient, 
 omnipresent and omnipotent. 
 
 § 5. Robert Barclay, in his " Apology Vindicated," 
 thus replies to an opponent: " I desire to know of 
 him in what Scripture he finds these words, 'That 
 the Spirit is a distinct person of the Trinity?' For 
 I freely acknowledge, according to the Scripture, 
 that the Spirit of God proceecleth from the Father 
 and the Son, and is God." 2 
 
 These quotations may be sufficient to prove that 
 the early Friends believed in the unity of the Di- 
 vine Being, agreeably to the Scripture testimony ; 
 " To as there is but one God, the Father, of whom are 
 
 1 Christian Progress of G. Whitehead, London ed. 1725, p. 635. 
 
 2 Barclay's Works, London ed. 1092, p. 745. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 39 
 
 all things, and we in him." The second part of the 
 text remains now to be considered: "And one Lord 
 Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by 
 him." 1 
 
 § 6. The Divinity of Christ, or God manifest in 
 the flesh, was uniformly maintained as one of the 
 doctrines of Friends ; they also acknowledged his 
 manhood in accordance with the Scriptures. 
 
 Man is an immortal soul united to a mortal body. 
 The body is referred to by the Apostle Paul as a 
 house in which the soul lodges for a time. He says : 
 "We know that if our earthlv house of this taber- 
 nacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a 
 house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." 2 
 The Messiah also referred to the body as a temple, 
 saying, "Destroy this temple and in three days I 
 will raise it up." * * * * " But he spake of the 
 temple of his body." 3 In this prediction it is the 
 soul that speaks, in the name or power of God, for 
 it is said he was "raised up from the dead by the 
 glory of the Father." 4 The soul of Christ is spoken 
 of in the Scriptures. He said, "Now is my soul 
 troubled." * * * * "My soul is exceeding sorrow- 
 ful, even unto death." 5 And in the Acts we read 
 that "His soul was not left in hell [Hades], neither 
 his flesh did see corruption." 
 
 § T. The cmestion arises, was it a human soul? 
 He spoke of himself as a man, saying, " Now ye 
 seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, 
 
 1 1 Cor. viii. G. 2 2 Cor. v. 1. 
 
 3 John ii. 19, 21. 4 Rom. yi. 4. 
 
 6 John xii. 27; Matt. xsvi. 38; Mark xiv. 13. 
 
40 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 which I have heard of God." ■ John the Baptist said 
 of him, " After me cometh a man which is preferred 
 before me; for he was before me." And Peter, on 
 the day of Pentecost, spoke of him, as " Jesus of 
 Nazareth, a man approved of God, among you by 
 miracles and wonders and signs which God did by 
 him." 2 " He took not on him the nature of angels, 
 but he took on him the seed of Abraham, where- 
 fore, in all things, it behooved him, to be made like 
 unto his brethren that he might be a merciful and 
 faithful high-priest." 3 " For we have not an high- 
 priest which cannot be touched with the feelings of 
 our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as 
 we are, yet without sin." 4 Now if he was in all 
 things made like unto his brethren, and in all points 
 tempted like as we are, yet without sin ; it follows 
 that he had the appetites, affection and desires of 
 our animal and spiritual nature which, if unre- 
 strained, will lead to sin ; but these propensities 
 were all kept in their places and governed by that 
 Divine power which dwelt in him, "For it pleased 
 the Father that in him should all fulness dwell." 5 
 
 § 8. Let us now consider who it was that " took 
 on him the seed of Abraham," thus assuming human 
 nature, in order to redeem mankind, and who 
 brought life and immortality to light through the 
 gospel. It was the Eternal Word (Logos) that was 
 in the beginning with God and was God. "The 
 "Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we 
 beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begottep 
 
 1 John viii. 40. 2 Acts ii. 22. 8 Ileb. ii. 1G, 17. 
 
 * Ileb. iv. 15. 6 Col. i. 19. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 41 
 
 of the Father,) full of grace and truth." 1 "For 
 the life was manifested, and we have seen it and 
 bear witness and show unto you that eternal life 
 which was with the Father, and was manifested 
 unto us." 2 "When the Most High, "in the begin- 
 ning," put forth his creative energy, saying, "Let 
 there be light;" this divine "Word," by which he 
 spoke the worlds into being, was an emanation from 
 himself, a manifestation of his wisdom and power. 
 The same holy and divine W r ord was manifested 
 to our first parents, while in a state of innocence, — 
 as their light and life ; but when they had trans- 
 gressed the divine law, it became their reprover, for 
 when they heard the voice of the Lord God walking 
 in the garden in the cool of the day, they hid them- 
 selves, and the Lord called unto Adam, and said 
 unto him, " Where art thou ? " 
 
 The Apostle Paul refers to this Eternal Word, as 
 being with the children of Israel in the wilderness, 
 for "they drank of that spiritual rock that followed 
 them, and that rock was C1irist." z Peter also refers 
 to the same, "the Spirit of Christ," which was in 
 the prophets, and which "testified beforehand of 
 the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should 
 follow." 4 
 
 In a treatise by Isaac Pennington, entitled "Life 
 and Immortality brought to Light," he treats "of the 
 threefold appearance of Christ, to wit, under the 
 law, in a body of flesh, and in his spirit and pow T er. ' 
 
 1 John i. 14. 2 1 John. i. 2. 
 
 3 1 Cor. x. 4. * 1 Pet. i. 11. 
 
 4* S 
 
42 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 Under the first head, he refers to the various ap- 
 pearances of Christ, as related in the Old Testa- 
 ment, — to Abraham on the plains of Mamre, — to 
 Jacob when he wrestled with the angel, — to Moses 
 at the burning bush, — to Joshua at Jericho, as the 
 captain of the Lord's host, — to the three children in 
 the fieiy furnace, when he appeared in the midst of 
 the fire in a form like the Son of God, — "and par- 
 ticularly that glorious appearance of God, sitting 
 upon a throne and his train filling the temple, as 
 seen by Isaiah, 1 when the Seraphims cried one unto 
 another and said, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of 
 hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory." This 
 was an appearance of Christ to the prophet, as is 
 manifest, John xii. 41, where the Evangelist (relat- 
 ing to that place) useth this expression: "These 
 things said Isaiah, when he saw his glory and spake 
 of him." 
 
 " Secondly, concerning Christ's appearance in the 
 body of flesh. When the time of these shadows 
 drew towards an end, and the fulness of time was 
 come, he who thus appeared in several types and 
 shadows among that people of the Jews under the 
 law, now came down from the Father, debased him- 
 self, and clothed himself like a man, partaking of 
 flesh and blood, and was in all things made like unto 
 us, (excepting sin, for he was the Lamb without 
 spot,) .humbling himself to come under the law 
 (and under the curse) by fulfilling the righteousness 
 thereof, and bringing them through into the right- 
 eousness everlasting. Now while he was in the 
 
 1 Isa. vi. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 43 
 
 body, his glory did shine to the eye of the children 
 of true wisdom : his disciples, (to whom not flesh 
 and blood, nor the wisdom and knowledge which 
 they could get from the letter, but his Father re- 
 vealed him,) they saw the hidden glory ; they saw 
 through the veil of flesh, and beheld him as the 
 only -begotten of the Father, full of grace aud 
 truth. 
 
 " Thirdly. !N"ow the third appearance of Christ, 
 which these two outward appearances made way for, 
 was his appearance in spirit ; even his pure, inward, 
 heavenly appearance in the hearts of his children. 
 This he bids his disciples wait for, telling them that 
 he would not leave them comfortless, but would come 
 again to them." * * * * " Did not Christ send the 
 Spirit, the Comforter? Did he not come in the 
 spirit and power of the Most High, to be with them 
 always to the end of the world?" ' 
 
 § 9. These views of Pennington are in accordance 
 with those generally expressed in the writings of the 
 early Friends; but the objection may arise, in the 
 minds of some : are there not here two Christs held 
 forth, — one the Eternal Word, the other "the man 
 Christ Jesus" ? To this it may be answered, it was 
 the indwelling of the Father that constituted Jesus 
 the Christ, — the anointed of God, — the Saviour of 
 men. He said, "I can of mine own self do noth- 
 ing; as I hear I judge, and my judgment is just, 
 because I seek not mine own will, but the will of 
 the Father which sent me." "The words that I 
 
 1 Pennington's Works, I. 376, 380. 
 
44 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the Father 
 that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." 1 
 
 § 10. In none of the writings of the early Friends 
 is this point more fully elucidated than in the ac- 
 count given by Sewel and Perm, of a debate between 
 the Friends and Baptists at the Barbican in London, 
 in the year 1674. The disputants on the part of the 
 Friends were George "Whitehead, Stephen Crisp, 
 William Perm, and George Keith. At that time, 
 Keith was in full unity with the Society, it being 
 about eighteen years before his apostasy. An ac- 
 count of this controversy having been given in the 
 Second Volume of this history, Chapter XII., its 
 insertion here is deemed unnecessary. It contains 
 an exposition of the views of the early Friends in 
 relation to the divinity and manhood of Jesus Christ. 
 They affirmed that "these names [Jesus Christ] are 
 given to him most properly and eminently as God, and 
 less properly, yet truly as man." And in William 
 Penn's letter to G. Fox, concerning this debate, he 
 says: "Christ is called the head, that is, the most 
 noble member : the church the body, and particulars 
 are styled members of that body." * * * * " In my 
 confession at the close, I said that we believed in 
 Christ: both as he was the man Jesus, and God 
 over all, blessed forever. And I am sure Paul di- 
 vides him more than we did, [Rom. ix. 5,) since he 
 makes a distinction between Christ as God and 
 Christ as man." 
 
 Another letter of William Penn, addressed to 
 
 1 John v. 30, and xiv. 10. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAKLY FRIEXDS. 45 
 
 Robert Turner in 1692, in relation to the Keithian 
 controversy, alludes to the same subject as follows, 
 viz.: "As to believing in Christ's manhood, it is 
 Friends' principle, he is like unto us in all things, 
 sin excepted, and that manhood is not vanished ; 
 though out of sicrht, it is somewhere ; and wherever 
 it is, it must be in a glorified state ; but what that 
 state is, or where it is, or how to frame ideas of 
 either in our minds, are intrusions or curiosities 
 above what is written or convenient. Can we hope 
 our manhood shall be glorified and denv his to be 
 so, that made way with his within the vail, for ours ? 
 He is glorified for us as our common head, and we 
 shall with him be glorified too, as his members, if we 
 through patience and tribulation overcome also." 
 * * * * n -g u j. now wnen t n i s \ s said, that Christ 
 
 came in our nature, and has glorified it as an eternal 
 temple to himself, yet he is to be known nearer 
 (than so without us), and that is in us. Thus Paul 
 knew him, and preached him as the riches of the 
 glory of the Christian day, the mystery hid from 
 ages and generations, and then revealed ' Christ in 
 them the hope of glory.' " ' 
 
 § 11. In the year 1G01, at the beginning of the 
 Keithian controversy in Pennsylvania, a number of 
 the most prominent Friends in England addressed 
 an Epistle to the brethren in America, from which 
 the following passage is selected. "Do not we be- 
 lieve our souls are immortal, and shall be preserved 
 in their distinct and proper beings, and spiritual 
 
 1 Janney's Life of Perm, p. 375. 
 
 S2 
 
46 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 glorious bodies, such as shall be proper for them, as 
 it shall please God to give, that we may be capable 
 of our particular rewards and different degrees of 
 glory after this life, or in the world to come ; as one 
 star differs from another star in glory and magnitude, 
 and they that turn many to righteousness shall shine 
 as the stars in the firmament forever and ever? 
 How then can it be otherwise believed, or appre- 
 hended in the truth, but that our most blessed and 
 elder brother Jesus Christ, even as mediator, is ever 
 in being in a most glorious state, (as with his 
 Heavenly Father,) who in the day of his flesh on 
 earth, so deeply and unspeakably suffered for us and 
 for all mankind, both inwardly and outwardly, — in- 
 wardly by temptations, sorrows, and burthens, (as to 
 his innocent soul by man's iniquities,) and outwardly 
 by persecutions and the cruel death of the cross, as 
 to his blessed body, which arose again the third 
 clay, and wherein he also ascended, according to the 
 Scriptures ; but it has not seemed proper or safe for 
 us to be inquisitive about what manner of change 
 his body had or met with after his resurrection and 
 ascension, so as to become so glorious, heavenly or 
 celestial as no doubt it is, far transcending what it 
 was when on earth, in a humble, low, and suffer- 
 ing condition." 
 
 " Neither has it been our places to be curious or 
 inquisitive about the bodies of the saints hereafter, 
 as to question how the dead are or shall be raised, 
 or with what bodies do they come, (or come they 
 forth). For if the apostle esteemed such questions 
 necessary to salvation, he would not have given 
 them such reprehension and answers as he did in 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAELY FRIENDS. 47 
 
 general terms, and for a spiritual body to be raised 
 and given as it pleaseth God, distinguishing the 
 spiritual from the natural, and the celestial from the 
 terrestrial bodies, which we have always believed, in 
 opposition to carnal professors, gross and carnal com 
 ceptions and imaginations, about the sameness of 
 carnal or earthly bodies." ' 
 
 § 12. In this letter, it will be observed, there are 
 two points pertinent to the present inquiry. First. 
 It was the belief of those Friends, that Jesus Christ, 
 the head of the Church, and the saints, his mem- 
 bers, in their heavenly state, are not in carnal, but 
 in spiritual bodies. This agrees with the following 
 language of G. Fox: "So if the 'vile body' be 
 changed and fashioned like unto his glorious body, it 
 is not the same, and consequently do not ye under- 
 value the Lord Jesus Christ and his body, ye that are 
 giving such by-names to his body, as humane and 
 humanity ? Yea, some have been so bold as to say 
 that he is in heaven with a natural and carnal body, 
 but these have been some of the grossest sort of 
 professors." 2 . 
 
 Secondly. The phrase, "our most blessed and 
 elder brother Jesus Christ," which occurs in the fore- 
 going letter, is significant ; nor is this the only in- 
 stance in which it is found in the writings of the 
 early Friends. William Bayly writes of our being 
 
 1 This letter, dated London 28th, 7th month, 1691, was signed 
 by George Whitehead, Samuel Waldingfield, John Field, Benj. 
 Antrobus, William Bingley, John Vaughton, Alex. Seaton, Danl. 
 Monro, and Patrick Livingston. It is inserted in Smith's Hist, 
 of Pa., Hazard's Register, Vol. VI. p. 243, and in Bowden's Hist. 
 Vol. II. 
 
 8 Doctrinals, 467, and Am. ed., V. 154. 
 
48 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 " possessors of a measure of the same spirit of grace 
 and truth that was in that person Christ our elder 
 brother." 1 And G. Fox the younger, in a letter ad- 
 dressed to General Monk, referring to the spirit of 
 forgiveness which he felt, says, " This I have learned 
 of Christ my elder brother, who is my strength and 
 ability, in whom I have peace, which the world can- 
 not take away." 2 
 
 § 13. The expression is not inconsistent with the 
 sacred writings, hut appears to he deduced from them. 
 The first-horn, or elder brother, amongthe Jews, was the 
 head of the family or tribe, and the heir of his father's 
 authority. The term was used as a title of dignity. 
 The Apostle Paul speaks of the Son of God as the 
 first-born among many brethren," 3 " For both he that 
 sanctifieth and the} 7 who are sanctified, are all of one; 
 for which cause he is not ashamed to call them 
 brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my 
 brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise 
 unto thee." 4 The Messiah frequently referred to the 
 believers as his brethren. After he was risen, he said 
 to Mary Magdalene, " Go to my brethren and say 
 unto them, ' I ascend unto my Father and to your 
 Father, and to my God and your God.' " 5 
 
 § 14. It will be observed that William Penn in his 
 letter to G. Fox, says, " Christ is called the Head, 
 that is the most noble member, the Church the body, 
 and particulars are styled members of that body." 
 And in his letter to P. Turner, again writing of the 
 manhood of Christ, he says, " He is glorified for us 
 
 1 W. Bayly's Works, Phila., 1830, p. 122. 
 
 2 Writings of G. Fox the younger, London ed., 1665, p. 266. 
 8 Bom. viii. 29. 4 Heb. ii. 11, 12, 5 John xx. 17. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAKLY FRIENDS. 49 
 
 as our common head, and we shall with him be glori- 
 fied too, as his members, if we through patience and 
 tribulation overcome also." This appears to corre- 
 spond with the Apostolic writings, in which the church 
 or assembly of the righteous is compared to the 
 human body. "For as the body is one and hath 
 many memjpers, and all the members of that one 
 body, being many are one body: so also is Christ/' * 
 " He is the head of the body, the Church ; who is 
 the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in 
 all things he might have the pre-eminence. For it 
 pleased the Father that in him should all fulness 
 dwell." 2 "Of his fulness have all we received, and 
 grace for grace." 3 "He whom God hath sent speak- 
 eth the words of God, for God hath not given the 
 Spirit by measure unto him." 4 "There is one God 
 and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, 
 and in you all, but to every one of us is given grace 
 according to the measure of the gift of Christ." 5 
 
 § 15. This distinction between the fulness of divine 
 life which dwelt in the Lord Jesus Christ, and the 
 measure of grace imparted to the members of his 
 spiritual body, according to their several capacities 
 or the services required of them, was constantly kept 
 in view by the early Friends. It was so distinctive a 
 feature in their communications, that the phrase, 
 "according to my measure," was considered, by the 
 world, one of the marks of Quakerism. 
 
 § 16. William Penn, in his " Christian Quaker," (ch. 
 xvi.,) writes as follows : " I have these two short 
 arguments farther to prove what I believe and assert 
 
 1 1 Cor. xii. 12. 2 Col. i. 18, 19. * John i. 16. 
 
 4 John iii. 34. * Eph. iv. 6, 7. 
 
 IV- 5 
 
50 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIEXDS. 
 
 as to the spirituality of the true seed, and a clear 
 overthrow it is to the opinion of our adversaries con- 
 cerning the true Christ. First, every thing begets its 
 like. What is simply natural produces not a spiritual 
 being. Material things bring not forth things that 
 are immaterial. ISTow because the nature or ima^e 
 begotten in the hearts of true believers-is spiritual, 
 it will follow, that the seed which so begets and 
 brings forth that birth must be the same in nature 
 with that which is begotten, therefore spiritual. 
 Then Christ's bocly. or what he had from the Virgin, 
 strictly considered as such was not the seed. 
 
 " Secondly, it is clear from hence: The Serpent is a 
 spirit. !Now nothing bruises the serpent's head in 
 man, but something that is also internal and spiritual, 
 as the serpent is. But if the body of Christ were 
 only the seed, then could he not bruise the serpent's 
 head in all, because the body of Christ is not so 
 much as in any one, (though too many have weakly 
 concluded it upon us, from a perversion or mistake 
 of our doctrine of Christ in man, by his light and 
 spirit,) and consequently the seed of the promise is an 
 holy and spiritual principle of light, life, and power, 
 that beinsr received into the heart bruiseth the ser- 
 pent's head. And because the seed (which in this 
 sense cannot be that body) is Christ, as testify the 
 Scriptures, the seed is one and that seed Christ, and 
 Christ God over all blessed forever, (G-al. iii. 16,) we 
 do conclude that Christ was, and is, the Divine word 
 of light and life, that was in the beginning with God, 
 and was and is, God over all blessed forever." x 
 
 § 17. Robert Barclay, in his "Apology for the true 
 
 1 Perm's Select Works, p. 260. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 51 
 
 Christian Divinity;" writing of the seed, grace, or 
 word of God, — the Light wherewith every one is 
 enlightened, says, by this: "We understand a spirit- 
 ual, heavenly and invisible principle in which God, 
 as Father, Son, and Spirit dwells; a measure of 
 which divine and glorious life is in all men as a 
 seed, which of its own nature draws, invites and in- 
 clines to God." * * * * "But by this we do not at 
 all intend to equal ourselves to that holy man the 
 Lord Jesus Christ who was born of the virgin Mary, 
 in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily, 
 so neither do we destroy the reality of his present ex- 
 istence, as some have falsely calumniated us. For 
 though we affirm that Christ dwells in us, yet not 
 immediately, but mediately, as he is in that seed 
 which is in us; whereas he, to wit, the Eternal Word, 
 which was with God and was God, dwelt immedi- 
 ately in that holy man. He then is as the head, and 
 we as the members; he the vine and we the branches. 
 We also freely reject the heresy of Appolinarius, 
 who denied him to have any soul, but said the body 
 was only actuated by the Godhead. As also the 
 error of Eutyches, who made the manhood to be 
 wholly swallowed up of the Godhead. Wherefore 
 as we believe he was a true and real man, so we also 
 believe that he continues so to be glorified in the 
 heavens in soul and body, by whom God shall judge 
 the world, in the great and general day of judg- 
 ment." 1 
 
 § 18. The same author, in his treatise called " Qua- 
 kerism confirmed," says: "Christ in us, or the Seed, 
 is not a third spiritual nature, distinct from that which 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. Y. and VI., § 13. 
 
52 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 was in the man Christ Jesus, that was crucified ac- 
 cording to the flesh at Jerusalem:" * * * * "the 
 same seed and life is in us, which was in him ; aud 
 is in him in the fulness, as water is in the spring; 
 and in us as the stream: and this seed and spiritual 
 nature, which is both in him and us, doth belong to 
 him, as he is the second Adam, or man Christ." 
 * * * * "This seed is not our souls; but is a medium 
 betwixt G-od and us : and our union with God is but 
 mediate through this; whereas the union of God with 
 this is immediate. Therefore none of us are either 
 Christ or God; but God and Christ are in us." 1 
 "If a man love me," said Christ, "he will keep my 
 words: and my Father will love him, and ive will 
 come unto him, and make our abode with him." 2 
 
 Now, if this Seed or Divine Word, "is a medium 
 betwixt God and us," and our union with him "is 
 but mediate through this," it must be through this, 
 that our Holy Head Christ Jesus, in whom all ful- 
 ness dwells, is the Mediator between God and man. 
 "For there is one God, and one mediator between 
 God and man, the man Christ Jesus." 3 As Moses 
 was a Mediator to ordain the legal dispensation, 4 so 
 Jesus Christ was and is the Mediator of the New 
 Covenant: first to proclaim and exemplify it, in the 
 day of his outward advent; and, secondly, through all 
 time, in the ministrations of his Spirit. "The Spirit 
 itself maketh intercession for us with groan ings that 
 cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts 
 knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he 
 maketh intercession for the saints according to the 
 
 1 Works of R. B., p. 627 and 628. 2 John xiv. 23. 
 
 3 1 Tim. ii. 5. 4 Deut. v. 5. Gal. iii. 19. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 53 
 
 will of God." * * * * "It is Christ that died, yea, 
 rather that is risen again, who is even at' the right 
 hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." 1 
 
 In accordance with this view, Geo. Fox writes: "I 
 say, none know him as a mediator and a lawgiver, 
 nor an offering, nor his blood that cleanseth them, hut 
 as they know him working in them, and they be in 
 the sophistry of their divinity that know not the 
 glory of the grace of Christ working in them." 2 
 
 § 19. "We ought to consider," writes Geo. White- 
 head, "that Christ as he is God and man, does not 
 act, or give spiritual gifts separately from God the 
 Creator; whether they be light, grace, spirit, power, 
 or wisdom, which 'are one principle and being; for 
 Jesus Christ, when he speaks as man, or as Media- 
 tor, always gives the preference to the Heavenly 
 Father, as when he saith: 'The Son can do nothing 
 of himself but what he seeth the Father do. And 
 my Father worketh hitherto and I work.' And like- 
 wise what power, glory, spirit, life, light, and wis- 
 dom, the Son hath to give or impart unto men, 
 (especially unto true believers, his followers,) it is all 
 first given him of the Father: He received gifts for 
 men, 'yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord 
 might dwell among them,' Psalm lxviii. 18. Of 
 whom did he receive them, but of his Heavenly 
 Father?" 3 
 
 § 20. Those who are familiar with the writings of 
 the early Friends, must have observed the deep re- 
 verence with which they speak of the blessed Jesus, 
 as the immaculate Son of God, and Saviour of men. 
 
 1 Rom. viii. 20, 27, 34. 
 
 3 Great Mystery, 58. Works, Am. ed., III. 119-20. 
 3 Christian Progress of G. Whitehead, p. 210. 
 5* IV — T 
 
54 VIEWS OF THE EAELY FRIENDS. 
 
 Doubtless the same feeling pervaded their religious 
 discourses; an instance of which is here subjoined, 
 being an extract from a "Farewell Sermon," preached 
 by Wm. Penn, in London just before his second voy- 
 age to America in 1699. 
 
 "It concerneth us all to live in the exercise of 
 that divine gift, and grace and ability, which our 
 Lord Jesus Christ hath distributed and communi- 
 cated to every member of his body, that we may 
 come to shine as stars in the firmament of glory. 
 We should do good in our several places and sta- 
 tions, according to our different powers and capaci- 
 ties. And as every member' is by the circulation of 
 the blood made useful and beneficial in the natural 
 body, so the divine life and blood of the Son of God 
 circulates through his mystical body, and readies life 
 to every living member. Here is no obstruction 
 through unfaithfulness or inordinate love of the 
 world, or any temptation from without us, or cur- 
 ruption from within us. Here is a free channel, here 
 is an open passage for life and quickening influences 
 from Christ our glorious Head, in all his members. 
 There is in Christ (in whom the Godhead dwells 
 bodily) a river whose streams make glad the city of 
 God, a fountain to supply and refresh the whole gen- 
 eration of the righteous that desire to be found in 
 M him, (as the apostle speaks,) not having their own 
 righteousness, but clothed with the robe of his 
 righteousness, which is the garment of salvation." 1 
 
 1 Janney's Life of Penn, 415 ; and The Friend,, London, od mo., 
 1803. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 55 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS COMPARED WITH THE 
 POPULAR THEOLOGY ON SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 § 1. It was a doctrine maintained both by the early 
 Friends and their opponents, that "Jesus Christ came 
 into the world to save sinners," and that this object 
 was promoted, by his life, his teachings and his suf- 
 ferings, but they differed in regard to the mode in 
 which this work is effected. 
 
 § 2. The Church of England in her second Article 
 teaches that, "Christ, very God and very man, truly 
 suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile his 
 Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original 
 guilt, but also for all actual sins of men." This Article 
 was modified by the Westminster Assembly by insert- 
 ing after the word "suffered," — "most grievous tor- 
 ments in his soul from God." In her eleventh Article 
 revised, it was asserted that "We are justified, that is 
 we are accounted righteous before God, and have 
 remission of sins, not for or by our own works or 
 deservings, but freely by his grace, only for our 
 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's sake, his whole obe- 
 dience and satisfaction being by God imputed unto us, 
 and Christ with his righteousness being apprehended 
 and rested on by faith only." 1 
 
 The commonly received doctrine of Atonement is, 
 " the satisfying of divine justice by Jesus Christ giving 
 himself a ransom for us, undergoing the penalty due to 
 our sins, and thereby releasing us from that punish- 
 ment which God might justly inflict upon us." Im- 
 
 1 Neal, II. 454-6. 
 
56 VIEWS OF THE EAKLY FRIENDS. 
 
 putation is defined to be, " God's gracious donation 
 of the righteousness of Christ to believers and his 
 acceptance of their persons as righteous on the account 
 thereof. Their sins being imjynted to him, and his obe- 
 dience being imputed to them, they are in virtue hereof 
 both acquitted from guilt and accepted as righteous 
 before God." Propitiation is defined, "a sacrifice 
 offered to God to assuage Ids wrath and render him 
 propitious." 1 And the new covenant is said to be 
 "ratified afresh by the blood and actual sufferings of 
 Christ." 2 
 
 § 3. It was moreover taught, as a part of the com- 
 monly received doctrine, that justification precede* 
 sanctification, and is not the result of any righteous- 
 ness in tin.' person justified; but from the righteous- 
 ness of Christ imputed to sinners who believe in him. 
 Hence the assertion — "The person therefore that is 
 justified, is accepted without <tny cause in himself,"' 
 
 § 4. R"ow the questions to be examined are th< 
 1. l)idthe early Friends believe or teach the doctrine 
 of imputative righteousness? 2. Did they teach the 
 doctrine of vicarious satisfaction, viz., That Jesua 
 Christ, as a substitute, paid the penalty of our sins, or 
 was punished tor man's transgressions, to satisfy divine 
 justice, or that he died to appease the wrath of God, 
 and reconcile his Father to us? 3. Did they teach that 
 justification precedes sanctification, or that justifica- 
 tion may take place without the subject of it being 
 made just? 4. And finally, did they believe that "the 
 blood of the everlasting covenant" by which redemp- 
 tion is effected, was the material blood of the Messiah 
 shed on Mount Calvary? 
 
 1 Buck's Theological Dictionary. • Craden's Con. 
 
 8 Buck's Theological Dictionary. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 57 
 
 § 5. In regard to imputative righteousness. The 
 question being asked, " whether a believer be justified 
 1 1\ Christ's righteousness imputed, yea or no ? " George 
 Fox answered, " He that believeth is born of God, 
 and he that is born of God is justified by Christ alone 
 without i input < it inn." 1 
 
 Win. Pcnn, in his " Sandy Foundation Shaken," 
 has one seetion with the following heading:, viz., 
 "The justification of impure persons, by an imputa- 
 tive righteousness, refuted from Scripture." Among 
 the texts quoted are these: "Keep thee far from a 
 false matter and the innocent and righteous slay thou 
 not, for I will not justify the wicked; " Ex. xxiii. 7. 
 *• lie that justifieth the wicked and he that condemn- 
 ed the just, even they both are an abomination to 
 the Lord ; ' Prov. xvii. j~>. "The son shall not bear 
 the iniquity of his father; the righteousness of the 
 righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of 
 the wicked shall be upon him." 
 
 "From whence it may be very clearly argued that 
 none can he in a state of justification from the right- 
 eousness performed by another imputed to them, but 
 a- they are actually redeemed from the commission 
 of sin." 
 
 Robert Barclay, in refuting the commonly received 
 doctrine, "That as our sin is imputed to Christ who 
 had no sin, so Christ's righteousness is imputed to us 
 without our being righteous," makes use of the fol- 
 lowing argument. "Though Christ bore our sins 
 and suffered for us, and was among men accounted a 
 sinner and numbered among transgressors ; yet that 
 
 1 Saul's Errand to Damascus, London ed. 1G54, p. 12, and Works 
 
 ofG. F., III. 595. 
 
 T2 
 
58 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 God reputed him a sinner is nowhere proved. For it 
 is said, ' he was found before him holy, harmless and 
 undefined, neither was there found any guile in his 
 mouth.' That we deserved these things and much 
 more for our sins which he endured in obedience to 
 the Father, and according to his counsel, is true ; but 
 that ever God reputed him a sinner, is denied : nei« 
 ther did he ever die that we should be reputed right- 
 eous ; though no more really such than he was a sinner, 
 (as hereafter appears). For indeed, if this argument 
 hold, it might be stretched that length as to become 
 very pleasing 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, not in the least in Christ, so it would 
 follow, that there needed no more righteousness, no 
 more holiness, no more inward sanctification in us 
 than there was sin in him. So then by his 'being 
 made sin for ue,' (2 Cor. v. 21,) must be understood 
 his suffering for our sins that we might be made par- 
 takers of the grace purchased by him ; by the workings 
 whereof we are made the righteousness of God in 
 him. For that the apostle 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, right- 
 eousness and unrighteousness, which must needs be 
 admitted, if men be reckoned ingrafted in Christ and 
 real members of him merely by an imputative right- 
 eousness, 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 con- 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 59 
 
 trary to the whole strain of the gospel ; a thing Christ 
 in none of his sermons and gracious speeches ever 
 willed any to rely upon ; always recommending to us 
 works as instrumental in our justification : and the 
 more 'tis to be admired at, because that sentence or 
 term (so frequent in their mouths and so often pressed 
 by them as the very basis of their hope and confi- 
 dence), to wit, the imputed righteousness of Christ, is not 
 to be found in all the Bible, at least, as to my obser- 
 vation." 1 
 
 "Alas!" says Isaac. Pennington, "how do men 
 mistake about the righteousness of Christ, about the 
 gospel righteousness; and in effect, make it but the 
 righteousness of the old covenant, performed in the 
 person of another for us, and imputed to us ! Whereas 
 it is the righteousness of another covenant, even of 
 the new and living covenant, which the Lord Jesus 
 worketh both in us and for us. Now whoever re- 
 ceiveth this righteousness from him, and is clothed 
 with it by him, he findeth it to be the righteousness 
 of the gospel, the new and living righteousness, the 
 true and everlasting righteousness, both of the father 
 and son, which the souls of those that truly believe 
 partake of in them and with them." 2 
 
 § 6. Did the early Friends teach the doctrine of 
 vicarious satisfaction; viz., that Jesus Christ, as a 
 substitute, paid the penalty of our sins, or was 
 punished for man's transgressions to satisfy divine 
 justice, or that he died to appease the wrath of God, 
 and reconcile his Father to us ? 
 
 Geo. Whitehead, in his work entitled "The Divi- 
 
 1 Barclay's Apology, London ed. 1692, Prop. VII. g 6. 
 8 Works of I. P., II. 519. 
 
60 VIEWS OF THE EAKLY FRIENDS. 
 
 nit j of Christ," in answer to Thomas Vincent and 
 others, states the difference between Friends' doctrines 
 and those of their opponents, as follows: — 
 
 " Query by G. W. How is this satisfaction made 
 by Christ ? " 
 
 "T. V. It depends upon him as the second person 
 in the Trinity." 
 
 " Query by G. W. Does it depend upon him as 
 man, or as God and man ?" 
 
 "T. V. 'It was necessary that the person that 
 should make satisfaction, should be man, because 
 none but a creature could suffer.' But then he adds, 
 'It were necessary he should be God, otherwise the 
 sufferings and satisfaction would have been but 
 finite.' " 
 
 " Query by G. W. What then, were the sufferings 
 infinite that the wicked inflicted upon the body of 
 Christ, seeing nothing but a creature could suffer, 
 he saith, and yet as a creature could give no propor- 
 tionable satisfaction to infinite justice. What con- 
 fusion is here! For as God he could not sutler nor 
 die, as is confessed; but God did strengthen the 
 manhood to bear up under such a pressure of wrath : 
 But where doth the scripture say, 'that Christ, the 
 second person in the Trinity, did suffer under infi- 
 nite wrath, either as God or man or both ? ' ' * * * * 
 "What amounts this to, that God made a satisfac- 
 tion to, and paid himself either by inflicting infinite 
 wrath upon Christ as God (which cannot be), or else 
 that he satisfied himself by the finite sufferings of 
 Christ as man, whereas that which was finite could 
 not satisfy infiniteness, (they say). And as God-man 
 can, they say he was the subject of wrath or vindic- 
 tive justice (as their term is). How these things 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIEXDS. 61 
 
 should be reconciled, I leave to the ingenious readers 
 to judge." 1 
 
 In an Appendix to his treatise entitled "The Pres- 
 byter's Antidote Tried," Geo. Whitehead writes as 
 follows : — 
 
 " Question. The satisfaction, what ? and in what 
 did it consist? " 
 
 u Answer. 1. Kot rigid payment from Christ to 
 God. 2. Not of the nature of payment for all sins 
 past, present, and to come, as stated by sin-pleasers. 
 3. Not Christ's undergoing infinite wrath or revenue 
 from his Father, for these were never exacted nor 
 required of him. But the satisfaction was in Christ 
 as the son of the Father's love, the delight of his 
 soul, and as he was a sacrifice of a sweet-smelling 
 savour to him. Both the Father and the Son conde- 
 scended in one and the same infinite love for man's 
 recovery out of sin and death, and for his deliverance 
 from wrath to come, they being equally kind to man 
 and equally angry at man's sin. God so loved the 
 world that he freely sent his only-begotten Son, <fec. 
 And in the same love the Son freely gave his life, 
 yea, even himself, a ransom for all, for a testimony 
 in due time." 
 
 " Question. "Whether divine justice did properly 
 and strictly require a full payment and punishment 
 upon Christ, in man's stead, for all the debt con- 
 tracted and injury done by fallen man ?" 
 
 "Answer. Ko ; Christ's sufferings were not of that 
 nature or intent; but as it was by the grace of God 
 that he tasted death for every man, they showed 
 God's patience and proclaimed his mercy, in order 
 
 1 The Divinity of Christ, by G. W. London ed. 1669, pp. 45, 46. 
 6 
 
62 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 to pardon all that return to him from the evil of 
 their ways." 1 
 
 In another work, Geo. "Whitehead thus replies to 
 an opponent: "That all men's debts should he so 
 strictly paid, or such a severe satisfaction made, to 
 vindicate justice, by Christ in their stead, which God 
 never imposed upon the son of his love, and that for 
 sins past, present, and to come (as some say) is in- 
 consistent. Besides the gross liberty this gives to 
 sin, how agrees it with his teaching them to pray, 
 'Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors?' 
 For what needed that, if they be all so strictly paid 
 in their stead." 2 
 
 Wm. Penn says, "I can boldly challenge any per- 
 son to give me one scripture phrase which does ap- 
 proach the doctrine of satisfaction, (much less the 
 name,) considering to what degree it is stretched, not 
 that we do deny, but really confess, that Jesus Christ, 
 in life, doctrine, and death, fulfilled his father's will, 
 and offered up a most satisfactory sacrifice ; but not 
 to pay God or help him (as otherwise being unable) 
 to save men." 3 
 
 Robert Barclay, in the 5th and 6th Propositions 
 of his Apology, treats of " Universal Redemption by 
 Christ." "God," he says, "hath so loved the world 
 that he hath given his only son a Light, that whosoever 
 believeth in him shall be saved, who enlighteneth 
 every man that cometh into the world and maketh 
 manifest all things that are reprovable, and teacheth 
 all temperance, righteousness and godliness, and this 
 
 1 The Presbyter's Antidote Tried, published with Christian Qua- 
 ker. Phila. 1824, p. 448. 
 
 2 Lux Eorta Est, ditto, p. 322. 
 
 8 Sandy Foundation Shaken, Penn's Select Works, p. 22. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 63 
 
 Light enlighteneth the hearts of all for a time in 
 order to salvation ; and this is it which reproves the 
 sin of all individuals and would ivork out the salva- 
 tion of all if not resisted." It is obvious from this 
 passage, that he attributes Redemption and Salvation 
 to that change of heart which is wrought in man by 
 obedience to the Light. This Light he says is univer- 
 sal, " being the purchase of his death who tasted death 
 for every man." 
 
 In these propositions, Barclay does not maintain 
 the doctrine of vicarious satisfaction, — he does not 
 say that the Messiah suffered death as a substitute 
 for sinners to satisfy a broken law, or to appease 
 divine wrath. There is however a passage in the 
 argument connected with these propositions, (§XV.) 
 which is erroneously supposed by some to bear that 
 construction. It reads as follows: "Nevertheless as 
 we firmly believe it was necessary that Christ should 
 come, that by his death and sufferings he might offer 
 up himself a sacrifice to God for our sins, who his 
 own self 'bare our sins in his own body on the tree,' 
 so we believe that the remission of sins which any 
 partake of, is only in and by virtue of that most 
 satisfactory sacrifice and no otherwise. For it is by 
 the obedience of that one, that the free gift is come 
 upon all to justification." 
 
 The meaning intended to be conveyed may be 
 elucidated by reference to other passages in the same 
 work, and by bearing in mind the belief of the early 
 Friends, that through the obedience and sufferings 
 of Christ he obtained for his Church Divine favor and 
 spiritual gifts, for "when he ascended up on high 
 he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men ;" 
 Eph. iv. 8. These gifts being " for the perfecting of 
 
64: VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edify- 
 ing of the body of Christ," had a direct relation to 
 the saltation of mankind. 
 
 It is therefore not warrantable, in construing the 
 passage last quoted from Barclay, to draw the conclu- 
 sion that he believed the sufferings of Christ had the 
 effect of appeasing the wrath, or satisfying the justice 
 of God. On the contrary, he attributes both sanc- 
 tification and justification to the work of Christ in 
 the obedient soul. "As many," he says, "as resist 
 not this light, but receive the same, in them is pro- 
 duced a holy, pure, and spiritual birth, bringing forth 
 holiness, righteousness, 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 work in us, are we sanctified ; so are 
 we justified in the sight of God, according to the 
 apostle's words, 'But ye are washed, but ye are sanc- 
 tified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.' " ' 
 
 The necessity of sacrifice to obtain Divine favor has, 
 from the earliest ages and throughout the world, been 
 very generally felt. To enlightened minds it has beei? 
 shown that the sacrifice acceptable to God is "a 
 broken spirit and a contrite heart," accompanied by 
 the offering up of every impure affection and lust. 
 These being understood to spring from the animal 
 nature, were typified by the beasts offered' in sacrifice, 
 the flesh being consumed, and the blood, which is 
 the life, sprinkled on the altar. 
 
 Such were the offerings made by Abel, Noah, and 
 the patriarchs. They were subsequently ordained 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. VII. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAELY FKIENDS. 65 
 
 and amplified in the ritual of Moses, which was 
 doubtless adapted to the condition of a people that 
 had for centuries been held in Egyptian bondage. 
 In the fulness of time the Messiah appeared to call 
 men from outward types to inward realities, and from 
 the letter to the spirit. "Blotting out the handwrit- 
 ing of ordinances," he " took it out of the way, nail- 
 ing it to his cross." ' The idea of sacrifice being 
 familiar to all, the term was applied figuratively, by 
 the writers of the ]S"ew Testament, not only to the 
 death of the Messiah on the cross, but to the martyr- 
 dom of the saints, to the surrender of the human 
 will and affections to the Divine government, and to 
 the good deeds performed by the believers in Christ. 
 Thus Paul says of his own expected martyrdom, "I 
 am now ready to be offered." 2 "If I be offered up- 
 on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and 
 rejoice with you all." 3 He writes to the brethren, 
 " I beseech you by the mercies of God that ye pre- 
 sent your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, accept- 
 able to God, which is your reasonable service." 4 
 And in acknowledging a gift sent him by the Phi- 
 lippians, he terms "it an odour of a sweet smell, a 
 sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God." 5 
 
 The same kind of figurative language is still in 
 use ; we speak of the reformers having sacrificed their 
 lives for the cause of truth, and of religious liberty 
 having been purchased by the blood of the martyrs; 
 but no oue thinks of taking such expressions literally. 
 
 § 7. The doctrine of Reconciliation, as taught in 
 the writings of the early Friends, is strictly in accord- 
 
 1 Col. ii. 14. 
 
 2 2 Tim. iv. 6. 
 
 3 Phil. ii. 17. 
 
 4 Rom. xii. 1. 
 
 
 6 Phil. iv. 18. 
 
 6* 
 
 U 
 
 
66 VIEWS OF THE EAELY FEIENDS. 
 
 ance with the Scriptures, being a change wrought in 
 man whereby he becomes reconciled to God. There 
 can be no change in Deity, — he has always loved 
 mankind. " God was in Christ reconciling the world 
 unto himself;" — not reconciling himself to the 
 world, — for there is no such language in the sacred 
 volume. On this point the views of Isaac Penning- 
 ton are clear and explicit, viz. : 
 
 " Question 1. What is reconciliation ? 
 
 Answer. It is a bringing together the minds and 
 hearts of God and man into one. 
 
 Quest. 2. How is this wrought? 
 
 Ans. By taking away the enmity of man's nature, 
 which is therein against God, and by planting him 
 into, and causing him to grow up in, that nature and 
 life which God loveth, whereby that is removed from 
 man which God hateth, and which is the cause of 
 separation ; and man brought into and brought up in 
 that which is the love and delight of God's heart. 
 
 Quest. 3. By what is this reconciliation wrought ? 
 
 Ans. By the Word of God's power. That comes 
 forth from the love of God unto man ; and man being 
 gathered out of himself into that, the evil seed is 
 thereby destroyed, and the good seed of the kingdom 
 thereby cherished, and groweth up in its shadow and 
 nourishment. 
 
 Quest. 4. How doth the Word work this ? 
 
 Ans. By winning upon man, and gathering him 
 into its light, out of man's own darkness, exercising 
 man various ways to empty him of himself, and make 
 him weak in himself, and putting forth its own strength 
 in and for man, as it hath emptied and weakened him 
 in himself." 1 
 
 1 Works of I. Pennington, I. 609. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 67 
 
 § 8. Did the early Friends teach that Justification 
 precedes Sanctification, or that Justification may take 
 place without the subject of it being made just? 
 
 Geo. Fox has expressed his view on this point in 
 unmistakable language, viz. : " They that are not 
 complete in sanctification are not complete in justifi- 
 cation, for they are one, they that are complete in the 
 one are complete in the other; and so far as a man 
 is sanctified, so far he is justified, and no farther; for 
 the same that sanctifies a man justifies him ; for the 
 same that is his sanctification is his justification, and 
 his wisdom, and his redemption. He that knows one 
 of them, knows all: he that cloth not feel one of 
 them, feels none of them at all, for they are all one." * 
 
 Richard Claridge, in a conference with a Baptist, 
 quoted the text, 1 Cor. vi. 11, "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;" 
 and said, that it was evident by the Apostle's words 
 that he did not lead us to an outward righteousness 
 only for our justification, but to an inward righteous- 
 ness as being the immediate cause thereof. For if 
 we attend to the order of the Apostle's testimony, we 
 must be washed and sanctified before we can be jus- 
 tified. And if we come to witness the efficacious 
 work of the spirit of Christ, in our cleansing and 
 sanctification, then we shall know ourselves to be in 
 a state of justification, and not till then. For though 
 Christ be a propitiation for the sins of the whole 
 world, yet no man can comfortably apply him as such 
 to his own soul, but as he first experiences the sanc- 
 tifying work of the Spirit." 2 
 
 1 Great Mystery, 284. Works of G. F. III. 450. 
 
 2 Works of R. Claridge, London ed. 1726, p. 78. 
 
68 VIEWS OF THE EAELY FRIENDS. 
 
 Robert Barclay, after quoting the same text, (1 Cor. 
 vi. 11,) proceeds to show that the term justified, as 
 there applied, "must needs be, a being really made 
 just, and not a being merely imputed such ; else 
 sanctified and washed might be reputed a being 
 esteemed so, and not a being really so : and then it 
 overturns the whole intent of the context. For the 
 Apostle showing them in the preceding verses, how 
 the unrighteous cannot inherit the kingdom of God, 
 and descending to the several species of wickedness, 
 subsumes, that they were sometimes such, but now 
 are not any more such. "Wherefore, as they are now 
 washed and sanctified, so are they justified." 
 
 It is further shown by Barclay, that the proper and 
 genuine interpretation of justified is being made just; 
 the word is "a composition of the verb facio, and the 
 adjective Justus, which is nothing else than thus: jus- 
 tijico, i. e. justum facio, to make just." l 
 
 § 9. Did they believe or teach that the " blood of 
 the everlasting covenant," by which redemption is 
 effected, was the material blood of the Messiah shed 
 on Mount Calvary? 
 
 George Fox wrote a tract, entitled "A Testimony 
 concerning the Blood of the Old Covenant and the 
 Blood of the New Covenant," from which the follow- 
 ing passages are quoted : "As Moses in the old cove- 
 nant sprinkied the people with the blood, the life of 
 beasts ; so Christ our high priest sprinkles the hearts 
 and consciences of his people, in the new covenant, 
 with his blood, his life, 'from their dead works that 
 they may serve the living God in newness of life.' 
 * * * * So the blood of the old covenant was the 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. VII. \ 7. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 69 
 
 life of the beasts and other creatures : and the blood 
 of the new covenant is the life of Christ Jesus, who 
 saith, ' except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye 
 have no life in you.' So the blood of the new cove- 
 nant is not according to the old, and so with this 
 blood of the new covenant must every one feel their 
 hearts sprinkled if they have life ; and in this new 
 covenant they shall all know the Lord, &c. And by 
 this blood of Jesus, his life in the new covenant, they 
 are justified, in whom we have redemption and the 
 forgiveness of sins ; and Christ hath purchased his 
 Church with his own blood, his life, and their faith 
 cloth stand in his blood which is the life of the Lamb. 
 Therefore the Apostle saith, 'If ye walk in the light 
 as he is in the light, then ye have fellowship one with 
 another, and the blood of Christ Jesus, his Son, 
 cleanseth from all sin.' " x This testimony is in accord- 
 ance with that of the Apostle John, viz., " God hath 
 given to us eternal life ; and this life is in his Son. 
 He that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not 
 the Son hath not life." * * * * " In him was life, and 
 the life was the light of men." 2 
 
 Isaac Pennington has expressed his sentiment on 
 this point in the following passage : — 
 
 " Question 1. What is redemption ? 
 
 " Answer. It is the purchasing of the vessel out of 
 the captivity and misery of death, into the liberty and 
 blessedness of divine life, sown, revealed, grown up 
 and perfected in the heart. 
 
 " Quest. 2. Who is the Redeemer? 
 
 " Ans. The Son of God, the child of God's beget- 
 
 1 Works of G. F., V. 363-4 ; Doctrinals, 644-5. 
 2 1 John v. 11, 12, and John i. 4. 
 
 U2 
 
70 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIEND3. 
 
 ting, the divine image who naturally believes and 
 fulfils the will of the Father, in every vessel which 
 it hath prepared. 
 
 " Quest. 3. By what doth he redeem ? 
 
 " Ans. By his blood; by his life ; by his power; by 
 his nature sown in the vessel, and transforming the 
 vessel into its own likeness. Yea, this is indeed re- 
 demption, when the creature is changed into and 
 brought forth in the image, power, nature, virtue and 
 divine life of him that redeem eth ; and the old con- 
 trary image perfectly blotted out by the presence 
 and indwelling of the new. This is perfect redemp- 
 tion, the least measure whereof is redemption in a 
 decree." l 
 
 Robert Barclay, in his work entitled "Truth cleared 
 of Calumnies," replies to an opponent as follows, viz. : 
 
 " Whereas thou sayest, ' Is not the application of 
 Christ's blood and sufferings necessary to them that 
 would profit and get good thereby; for though the 
 blood of Christ be a healing plaster, yet the plaster 
 must be applied ere the sore can be healed. jSTow 
 what application can the soul make of Christ's blood, 
 who knows no such thing? The blood of Christ is 
 applied by faith, but true faith is not a blind faith.' 
 
 "Answer. It is granted: but this blood is known 
 and felt within, to wash and purge the conscience ; 
 for Christ, as he is within is not without his blood, 
 which is spiritual, even the pure blood of the vine ; and 
 is that wine of the kingdom which is inwardly felt to 
 wash and to refresh, which he gives to them who 
 know not distinctly the outward shedding of the blood 
 as it was many hundred years ago, and which many 
 
 1 Pennington's Works, I. 610. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 71 
 
 are ignorant of who have heard much of the outward 
 shedding of his blood, but know not the blood as shed 
 and poured forth in them, to sprinkle their consciences 
 from dead works ? for it is a mystery sealed up from 
 all who stand in opposition to his light within. But 
 there mark thy own words, ' the plaster must be 
 applied, ere the sore can be healed.' Must not the 
 saving grace be applied ere the soul can be converted 
 or healed?" 1 
 
 It is observed by Wm. Penn, that " one outward 
 thing cannot be the proper figure or representative of 
 another. Nor is it the way of holy Scripture so to 
 teach us. The outward Lamb shows forth the inward 
 Lamb ; the Jew outward the Jew inward." 2 
 
 In accordance with this view, Geo. "Whitehead asks, 
 "Did not the killing and sacrificing of bulls, goats 
 and heifers typify or figure forth the killing and 
 destroying that corrupt, beastly nature and enmity in 
 man, which is for death and destruction, and of which 
 those beasts were as a lively emblem ? " 3 
 
 § 10. Having shown by the foregoing extracts from 
 the writings of the most prominent among the early 
 Friends, that they did not believe or teach some of 
 the doctrines then deemed essential by the churches 
 called orthodox ; it is proper now to demonstrate that 
 they did believe and teach the doctrine of salvation 
 by Christ, as set forth in the New Testament. 
 
 The healing of the soul, as suggested by Barclay, is 
 one of the most appropriate figures to illustrate the 
 nature of salvation; for as sin is a malady of the 
 soul that will cause spiritual death, so salvation is the 
 
 Barclay's Works, p. 10. * 2 Select Works, p. 260. 
 
 Presbyter's Antidote Tried, Appendix. 
 
72 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 health of the soul, and will secure eternal life. As 
 the Messiah, through the divine power that dwelt in 
 him, wrought many great miracles, healing the sick 
 and cleansing the lepers, causing the blind to see and 
 the deaf to hear, and even restoring the dead to life ; 
 so the same Divine Power, or Spirit of Christ, now 
 heals the maladies of the soul, cleanses it from pollu- 
 tion, enables it to see his light and to hear his word, 
 and thus restores it from death to life. 
 
 The redemption that is wrought for us by Christ 
 as a spirit of light and life in the soul, and the work 
 of reconciliation that was effected by him while in 
 that "body prepared" in which he came to do his 
 Father's will, arc explained at large m the 17th and 
 18th chapters of Wm. Perm's "Christian Quaker." 
 In order to present both aspects of the subject as 
 treated by him, the following selections may suffice. 
 
 "As at anv time disobedient men have hearkened 
 to the still small voice of the Word, that messenger 
 of God in their hearts, to be affected and convinced 
 by it, as it brings reproof for sin, which is but a 
 fatherly chastisement; so upon true broken u ess of 
 soul and contrition of spirit, that very same Principle 
 and word of life in man, has mediated and atoned, and 
 God has been propitious, lifting up the light of his 
 countenance, and replenishing such humble penitents 
 with divine consolations. So that still the same 
 Christ, Word-God, who has lighted all men, is by sin 
 grieved and burdened, and bears the iniquities of such 
 as so sin and reject his benefits. But as any hear his 
 knocks and let him into their hearts, he first wounds 
 and then heals. Afterwards he atones, mediates and 
 reinstates man in the h<^y image he is fallen from by 
 sin. Behold this is the state of restitution ! and this 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 73 
 
 in some measure was witnessed by the holy patriarchs, 
 prophets and servants of God in old time, to whom 
 Christ was substantially the same Saviour and seed bruis- 
 ing the serpent's head that he is now to us, what dif- 
 ference soever there may be in point of manifestation. 
 "But, notwithstanding, it was the same light and 
 life with that which afterwards clothed itself with 
 that outward body, which did in measure inwardly 
 appear for the salvation of the souls of men, yet, as 
 I have often said, never did that Diflne Life so emi- 
 nently show forth itself, as in that sanctified and pre- 
 pared body." * * * * "Consider what I say with this 
 qualification, that ultimately and chiefly, not Wholly 
 and exclusively, the Divine Life in that body was the 
 Redeemer. For the sufferings of that holy body of 
 Jesus had an engaging and procuring virtue in them, 
 though the Divine Life was that fountain from whence 
 originally it came. And as the Life declared and 
 preached forth itself through that holy body, so 
 those who then came to the benefit procured by the 
 Divine Life, could only do it through an hearty con- 
 fession to it a? appearing in that body, and that from 
 a sense first given by a measure of the same in them- 
 selves. This is the main import of those places, 
 'whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation,' and 
 4 in whom we have redemption through faith in his 
 blood.' Bom. iii. 25. For who is this He, whom 
 God hath set forth, and in whom is redemption ? 
 Certainly, the same He that was before Abraham, the 
 rock of the Fathers, that cried: 'Lo I come to do 
 thy will, God; a body hast thou prepared me;' 
 which was long before the body was conceived and 
 born." 1 
 
 1 Select Works of W. Penn, pp. 262, 266. 
 IV — 7 
 
74 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 These extracts from the works of Barclay, Penn, 
 and Pennington, the ablest authors among the early 
 Friends, might, if it were deemed needful, be cor- 
 roborated by many passages from the writings of 
 other Friends contemporary with them. 
 
 § 11. In treating of the sufferings of Christ, there 
 is, perhaps, no part of the Old Testament so frequently 
 quoted as the 53d chapter of Isaiah. It is referred 
 to by the evangelist Matthew in the following re- 
 markable passage, viz : " When the even was come, 
 they brought unto him many that were possessed 
 with devils; and he cast out the spirits with his word, 
 and healed all that were sick: that it might be ful- 
 filled which was spoken by Esaias, the prophet, saying, 
 Himself took our infirmities and bare our sick- 
 nesses." In considering this passage, the query 
 arises, how did he take their infirmities and bear 
 their sicknesses? Assuredly not by becoming him- 
 self infirm and sick, nor were they healed by having 
 his health imputed to them ; but "he cast them out 
 by his word," which was " the power of God and the 
 wisdom of God." In like manner the same divine 
 Word, or Spirit of Christ, still removes our iniqui- 
 ties ; not by imputation, but by healing our spiritual 
 diseases, if we have faith in him and obey his law. 
 
 It is admitted, even by trinitarian writers, that 
 " the doctrine of atonement, as far as relates to sin, 
 is nothing more than the doctrine of reconciliation. 
 And indeed, in a sense agreeable to this, that of 
 bringing into a state of concord and reconciliation, 
 the word atonement itself had been originally used 
 by our old English writers, with whom, according 
 to Junius, Skinner, and Johnson, it was written at- 
 one-ment; signifying to be at-one or to come to 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 75 
 
 an agreement." 1 Fow, as "the carnal mind is 
 enmity against God," and as no change can take 
 place in Deity, the change must' be wrought in man, 
 in order that reconciliation may be effected. Hence 
 the peculiar force and propriety of the expression 
 used by the Apostle Paul, ""We are ambassadors for 
 Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we 
 pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to God." 
 Tins language is similar to that of the Most High 
 through his prophet Ezekiel, "I have no pleasure in 
 the death of the wicked ; but that the wicked turn 
 from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye, from your 
 evil ways; for why will ye die, house of Israel ?" 
 
 It is evident that there is nothing implacable in 
 the character of the Deity; the mission of Christ 
 was an evidence of his love and mercy to mankind. 
 "God so loved the world that he gave his only-be- 
 gotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should 
 not perish, but have everlasting life." 
 
 The object of his mission is thus stated by him- 
 self: "To this end was I born, and for this cause 
 came I into the world, that I should bear witness 
 unto the truth." 2 He could not bear witness to the 
 truth among that perverse and wicked people with- 
 out suffering for it. Foreseeing the result, he pro- 
 phesied of his death and resurrection, — and willingly 
 laid down his life as a testimony for the truth, in 
 oider to promote the salvation of the w T orld. His 
 sufferings were both mental and corporeal, and being 
 endured in obedience to the will of his Father, (for 
 he said, not my will but thine be done,) the sacrifice 
 thus made was an offering acceptable to God, and an 
 
 1 Magee on Atonement, pp. 184, 186. 2 John xviii. 37. 
 
76 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 evidence to man that "He who spared not his own 
 son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he 
 not with him also freely give us all tilings?" 1 There 
 can be no doubt that his agony in the garden of 
 Gethsemane, as well as his mental Bufferings on 
 Mount Calvary, when 1 cried out, "My God, my 
 God, why hast thou forsaken me?" were occasioned 
 by the deep sense he had of the sins of mankind, 
 the burden of which lay upon him and induced him 
 to say, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto 
 death." He was "baptized into death," he entered 
 into sympathy and suffering for a fallen world; "he 
 humbled himself and became obedient unto death, 
 even the death of the cross." Before his crucifixion 
 it was said, "the Holy Ghost was not yet given be- 
 cause Jesus was not }*et glorified;" that is, it was 
 not poured forth so abundantly as on the day of 
 Pentecost. But after his resurrection, "He ascended 
 up on high, he led captivity captive and gave gifts 
 unto men." "Therefore," said Peter, "being by the 
 right hand of God exalted, and having received of the 
 Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed 
 forth this which ye now see and hear." It may 
 therefore be truly said he is our " propitiation," "the 
 mediator of the new covenant," through whom favor 
 is received. 
 
 The personal ministry of Christ, his sublime doc- 
 trines, pure life, and wonderful miracles, made, com- 
 paratively, few converts; but when he laid down his 
 lite for the sheep, and sealed his testimony with his 
 blood, the impression was far deeper, and then the 
 apostles going forth in his name and power, were 
 
 1 Rom. viii. 32. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EAELY FRIENDS. 77 
 
 instrumental in gathering many thousands to his 
 fold. They preached not themselves, " but Christ 
 Jesus, the Lord," and to the gift of grace through him, 
 they attributed the wonderful success of their min- 
 istry. Thus we see that the effect of Christ's suffer- 
 ings upon gn-at numbers in that day, was to remove 
 the enmity from their hearts, and by this means 
 reconcile them to God; and the same result has been 
 witnessed to some extent in every age of the Chris- 
 tian Church. But it is the life or power of Christ 
 operating in the soul, that saves from sin, and hence 
 the Apostle Paul says, "If when we were enemies we 
 were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, 
 much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by 
 his life." 1 For in him was life, and the life was the 
 light of men. 2 
 
 § 12. They who would reign with Christ must be 
 willing to suffer with him. The Apostle Paul wrote 
 to the Colossians : "I now rejoice in my sufferings 
 for you, and till up that which is behind of the afflic- 
 tions of Christ, for his body's sake which is the 
 Church.'' The true ministers of the Gospel must, at 
 time-, be baptized into sympathy and suffering for 
 the condition of the people, in order that they may 
 minister to their wants; for the whole Church is repre- 
 sented as one body, and, " whether one member 
 suffer, all the members suffer with it, or one member 
 be honored, all the members rejoice with it." 
 
 An instance of this spiritual suffering is mentioned 
 in the Journal of G. Fox, who, being asked by Pri 
 
 vens, "Why Chrisl cried out upon the cross, 'My 
 God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? ' and why 
 
 1 Rom. v. 10. 2 John i. 4. 
 
 7* IV — V 
 
78 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 he said, 'If it be possible let this cup pass from me,' " 
 replied as follows : " At that time the sins of the 
 whole world were upon him, and their iniquities and 
 transgressions, with which he was wounded, which 
 he was to bear and be an offering for, as he was man, 
 but died not as he was God ; so in that he died for 
 all men, tasting death for every man, he was an offer- 
 ing for the sins of the whole world. This I spoke 
 being at that time in a measure sensible of Christ's 
 sufferings and what he went through." Thus it ap- 
 pears that George Fox was brought into fellowship 
 with Christ in his sufferings, even as Paul was enabled 
 to know him and " the power of his resurrection and 
 the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conform- 
 able unto his death." 1 
 
 § 13. In the letter of Geo. Fox and others to the 
 Governor and Council of Barbadoes, a full testimony 
 is borne to the divinity of Christ, his miraculous con- 
 ception, his sufferings, resurrection, and mediation. 
 The following extract may suffice, viz. : " This Jesus 
 who was the foundation of the holy prophets and 
 apostles is our foundation, and we do believe that there 
 is no other foundation to be laid, but that which is 
 laid, even Christ Jesus, who, we believe, ' tasted 
 death for every man and shed his blood for all men, 
 and is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours 
 only, but also for the sins of the whole world. Ac- 
 cording as John the Baptist testified of him, when 
 he said, ' Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away 
 the sins of the world.'" * * * * "He it is that is 
 now come, and hath given us an understanding, that 
 we may know him that is true ; and he rules in our 
 
 1 Phil. iii. 10. 
 
VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 79 
 
 hearts by his law of love and of life, and makes us 
 free from the law of sin and death, and we have 
 no life but by him, for he is the quickening Spirit, 
 the Second Adam, the Lord from heaven: by whose 
 blood we are cleansed, and our consciences sprinkled 
 from dead works to serve the living God." ■ 
 
 ■ In one of his tracts, Geo. Fox writes as follows : 
 "The blood of Christ which satisfies the Father, 
 which the saints drink, and his flesh which they eat, 
 which in so doing they have life, is that which the 
 world stumble at; which who drinks lives forever. 
 And the Apostle preached the word of faith in their 
 hearts and in their mouths, and the word reconciles 
 to the Father, and hammers down, and cuts down, 
 and burns up that which separates from the Father; 
 and over it gives victory." * * * * "Whosoever 
 hath not Christ within, is a reprobate, and whoso- 
 ever hath Christ within, hath the righteousness. 2 
 Now Christ that suffered, Christ that was offered 
 up, is manifest within, and the saints are of his 
 flesh and of his bone, and eat his flesh and drink 
 his blood, and not another. The Christ that ended 
 the priesthood, ended the offering, ended the temple, 
 ended the law, and the first covenant, the seed of 
 God, Christ Jesus, this is manifest within ; he that 
 hath him hath life, justification, sanctification, and 
 redemption." * * * * "And none lift up the Son of 
 God, as the serpent was lifted up in the wilderness, 
 but as every one is in the light, that the Son of God 
 hath enlightened him withal, and then they know 
 
 1 See letter of G. Fox to Gov. of Barbadoes, Appendix to Vol. 
 II. of this History. 
 
 2 " He that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the 
 Son hath not life." 1 John v. 12. 
 
80 VIEWS OF THE EARLY FRIENDS. 
 
 him that draws all men after him." l In this passage 
 and in many others that might be adduced from the 
 writings of G. Fox, he explains what he means by 
 that blood of Christ, which "satisfieth the Father," 
 and "reconciles to the Father," even that blood which 
 the saints drink, — that life or Spirit of Christ which 
 renovates the soul. 
 
 In accordance with this view Robert Barclay writes 
 " The body then of Christ, which believers partake 
 of, is spiritual and not carnal, and his blood, which 
 they drink of, is pure and heavenly, and not human 
 or elementary." 
 
 In conclusion, it may safely be asserted that the 
 early Friends believed and taught the scriptural doc- 
 trine of salvation by Christ, as a work effected by 
 divine power in the humble obedient soul ; but while 
 they relied upon "the law of the spirit of life in 
 Christ Jesus," which made them "free from the law 
 of sin and death," they failed not to acknowledge 
 their gratitude to Him, "who gave himself for us 
 that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify 
 unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good 
 works." 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 HISTORICAL REVIEW OF FRIENDS' DOCTRINES FROM 
 
 1690 TO 1814. 
 
 Having shown what were the doctrines generally 
 held by Friends in the time of Geo. Fox, the next 
 point for consideration, is the inquiry, whether any 
 
 1 Works of G. Fox, III. 227 228. Great Mystery, 131. 
 
1693.] KEITHIAN CONTROVERSY. 81 
 
 changes have subsequently taken place in the religious 
 views of the Society in Great Britain and Ireland, or 
 in America. 
 
 Soon after the death of Fox, a controversy sprung 
 up in America caused by the disaffection of George 
 Keith and the charges of unsoundness in doctrine 
 which he brought against the Society. This contro- 
 versy having been treated of in a preceding chapter, 
 requires but a brief notice here. 1 
 
 The Keithians assumed the name of Christian 
 Quakers, adopted a confession of faith, and issued a 
 testimony against their former brethren, charging 
 them with heresy. The chief points of difference 
 between the views of George Keith and those of 
 Friends, at the time of his separation, were, that he 
 held the doctrines of original sin, the Trinity, and 
 imputative righteousness. 2 He afterwards embraced 
 the other doctrines of the Church of England, and 
 was ordained a minister of that body. 
 
 In the year 1693, thirty-one Friends in England, 
 among whom was George Whitehead, caused the 
 following confession of faith to be presented to 
 Parliament, in order to clear the Society of aspersions 
 cast upon it by "Francis Bugg, an envious apostate."' 
 
 "Be it known to all, that we sincerely believe and 
 confess, I. That Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of 
 the Virgin Mary, is the true Messiah, the very Christ, 
 the son of the living God, to whom all^the prophets 
 gave witness: and that we do highly value his death, 
 sufferings, works, offices, and merits, for the redemp- 
 
 1 See History, Vol. III. chap. 3. 
 
 2 See, examination of Keith's doctrines, Hist, of Fds., Vol. III. 
 chap. 3. 
 
 3 Sewel, II. 357. 
 
 V2 
 
82 CONFESSION" OF FAITH. [1694. 
 
 tion of mankind, together with, his laws, doctrine, 
 and ministry. 
 
 II. That this very Christ of God, who is the Lamb 
 of God that takes away the sins of the world, was 
 slain, was dead, and is alive, and lives forever in his 
 divine, eternal glory, dominion and power with the 
 Father. 
 
 III. That the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New 
 Testament are of divine authority, as being given by 
 the inspiration of God. 
 
 IV. And that magistracy or civil government is 
 God's ordinance, the good ends thereof being for the 
 punishment of evil-doers, and praise of them that 
 do well." 
 
 The Yearly Meeting of Friends held in London 
 in 1694, issued the following advice to the subor- 
 dinate meetings : "If there be any such gross errors, 
 false doctrines, or mistakes held by any professing 
 truth, as are either against the validity of Christ's 
 sufferings, blood, resurrection, ascension, or glory in 
 the heavens, according as they are set forth in the 
 Scriptures; or any ways tending to the denial of the 
 heavenly man Christ; such persons ought to be dil- 
 igently instructed and admonished by faithful Friends 
 and not to be exposed by any to public reproach ; 
 and when the error proceeds from ignorance and 
 darkness of their understanding, they ought the 
 more meekly and gently to be informed ; but if they 
 shall wilfully persist in error in point of faith, after 
 being duly informed, then such to be further dealt 
 with according to gospel order, that the truth, church, 
 or body of Christ may not suffer by any parti- 
 cular pretended member that is so corrupt." 1 This 
 
 1 Extracts from Minutes and Advices, &c. London, 1802, p. 50. 
 
1726.] ADVICES OF PHILA. YEARLY MEETING. 
 
 83 
 
 minute was incorporated into the rules of discipline 
 of London Yearly Meeting. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania and New 
 Jersey, in the year 1694, and again in 1704, issued 
 "A General Testimony" addressed to its members, 
 which contained a declaration of faith in relation to 
 several points of doctrine expressed entirely in scrip- 
 ture language. 1 
 
 In 1732, the same Yearly Meeting issued the follow- 
 ing advice: "We tenderly and earnestly advise and 
 exhort all parents and heads of families, that they 
 endeavor to instruct their children and families in 
 the doctrines and precepts of the Christian religion, 
 as contained in the Holy Scriptures; and that they 
 incite them to the diligent reading of those excellent 
 writings, which plainly set forth the miraculous con- 
 ception, birth, holy life, wonderful works, blessed 
 example, meritorious death, and glorious resurrec- 
 tion, ascension and mediation, of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ; and to educate their children 
 in the belief of those important truths, as well as in 
 the belief of the inward manifestation and operation 
 of the Holy Spirit on their own minds, that they 
 may reap the benefit and advantage thereof, for their 
 own peace and everlasting happiness; which is infin- 
 itely preferable to all other considerations." 2 
 
 In the year 1726, Richard Claridge published a 
 treatise entitled, "An Essay on xhe Doctrine of 
 Christ's Satisfaction for the Sins of Mankind, where- 
 in Wm. Penn's book called the ' Sandy Foundation 
 Shaken,' is defended against the exceptions of 
 Francis Bugg; and the vulgar doctrine of Satisfac- 
 
 1 MS. records. a Book of Discipline. 
 
84 VIEWS OF R. CLARIDGE. [1726. 
 
 tion farther refuted from the testimony of the Holy 
 Scriptures and the concurrent opinions of many, 
 both ancient and modern writers." 
 
 In this work he says: " As we distinguish between 
 a Scripture Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
 which we unfeignedly believe; and that humanly de- 
 vised Trinity of three distinct and separate persons, 
 which we receive not, because the Holy Scriptures 
 make no mention of it: so we distinguish between 
 Scripture redemption and the vulgar doctrine of 
 Satisfaction. The first we receive, the second we 
 reject." 
 
 The vulgar, or commonly received, doctrine of 
 Satisfaction he thus defines, in the words of William 
 Penn: "That it is impossible for God to remit or 
 forgive sin, without a plenary Satisfaction, fee.," 
 which, he says, "is not to be found in Scripture, so it 
 is disallowed of by many, both ancient and modern 
 writers." 1 * * * * "As it was," continues R. Clar- 
 idge, "the main design of Christ's life, doctrine and 
 miracles to call men to repentance, faith, and obedi- 
 ence, so it was also the great end of his Bufferings 
 and death to accomplish the same glorious design. 
 For 'he gave himself for our sins, that he might 
 deliver us from this present evU world, according to 
 the will of God and our Father, Gal. i. 4. 'lie loved 
 the church and gave himself for it, that he might 
 sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by 
 the word; that he might present it to himself a glo- 
 rious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any Buch 
 thing: but that it should be holy and without blem- 
 ish.' Ep. v. 25, 26, 27. This was a piincipal end 
 
 1 Life of R. Claridge, p. 428. 
 
1732.] VIEWS OF J. besse. 85 
 
 of his giving himself for us, or offering himself a 
 sacrifice of propitiation for the sins of mankind. 
 'For he died for all, that they which live should not 
 live unto themselves, but unto him which died for 
 them and rose again.' 2 Cor. v. 15. This is the 
 argument that the apostle much insisted upon, and 
 for the farther enforcing of it, I shall mention but 
 two places more. 'Ye are bought,' saith he, 'with a 
 price, therefore glorify God in your body, and in 
 your spirit which are God's.' 1 Cor. vi. 20. 'And 
 you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in 
 your mind by wicked works, }-et now hath he recon- 
 ciled in the body of his flesh through death, to pre- 
 sent you holy and unblamable, and unreprovable in 
 his sight.'" Col. i. 21. 1 
 
 In the year 1732, a book was published in London, 
 entitled "A Defence of Quakerism," by Joseph 
 Besse. In this work the false charges against 
 Friends and misrepresentations of their writings 
 made by Patrick Smith, a vicar in the established 
 Church, are ably refuted, and the doctrines of the 
 Society established by many quotations from their 
 earliest and most valued authors, corroborated by 
 scripture testimony. It maintained that the views 
 originally promulgated by Geo. Fox and his coad- 
 jutors were still held by the Society. 
 
 From the date of the publication last noticed, 
 until near the close of the 18th century, there ap- 
 pears to have been but little religious controversy 
 in the Society, and there is no reason to suppose 
 there was any change in its doctrines. A strict ad- 
 herence to scriptural language on controverted points 
 
 1 Life of R. Claridge, 445. 
 8 
 
86 bevan's summary. [1790. 
 
 had the advantage of securing peace and concealing 
 from public view any difference of sentiment that 
 may have existed among its ministers. The work of 
 Joseph Phipps, published about the year 1788, on 
 "the original and present state of man," is so nearly 
 in accordance with the doctrines of Barclay's "Apol- 
 ogy," that a particular notice of it is deemed unneces- 
 sary. 
 
 At the desire of the Meeting for Sufferings in Lon- 
 don, a "Summary of the History, Doctrine and Dis- 
 cipline of the Society of Friends " was written by 
 Joseph Gurney Bevan, and published in the year 
 1790. ■ The first three paragraphs, relating to the 
 "general belief" of the Society, are here subjoined, 
 viz. : — 
 
 " We agree with other professors of the Christian 
 name, in the belief of one eternal God. the creator and 
 preserver of the universe ; and in Jesus Christ his Son, 
 the Messiah and Mediator of the new covenant. 
 
 "When we speak of the glorious display of the 
 love of God to mankind in the miraculous conception, 
 birth, life, miracles, death, resurrection and ascension 
 §f our Saviour, we prefer the use of such terms as we 
 find in Scripture ; and contented with that knowledge 
 which Divine wisdom hath seen meet to reveal, we 
 attempt not to explain those mysteries which remain 
 under the veil ; nevertheless we acknowledge and 
 assert the Divinity of Christ, who is the wisdom and 
 power of God unto salvation. 
 
 1 London Ed. 1800, appended to " A Refutation of Modern Mis- 
 representations, &c." The "Summary" was republished in 1846, 
 with sundry alterations, for the Tract Association of Friends in 
 England. 
 
1793.] job scott's views. 87 
 
 " To Christ alone we give the title of the Word of 
 God, and not to the Scriptures ; although we highly 
 esteem these sacred writings, in subordination to the 
 Spirit from which they were given forth ; and we 
 hold with the Apostle Paul, that they are able to 
 make wise unto salvation, through faith which is in 
 Christ Jesus." 
 
 In America, the writings of "Woolman, Benezet, 
 and some others, published about the middle of the 
 18th century, contributed to promote practical piety, 
 but were not designed to elucidate those points of doc- 
 trine which have been the chief subjects of religious 
 controversy. 
 
 In the year 1793, Job Scott, of Providence, R. L, 
 one of the most eminent ministers in the Society, 
 while engaged in a gospel mission to Great Britain 
 and Ireland, was called to exchange the trials of time 
 for the rewards of eternity. He left behind him a 
 Journal and other writings on religious subjects, most 
 of which have since been published, and are found to 
 be replete with spiritual instruction. 
 
 In a letter written just before his death, he says: " I 
 trust I as firmly believe in the Divinity of Christ as any 
 man living, but I have no more belief that there are 
 two divinities than two Gods. It is altogether clear to 
 my mind, that, that one Divinity actually became the 
 seed of the woman, and bruised the serpent's head, as 
 early as any man ever witnessed redemption from sin, 
 and is one in the head and in all the members, he beino- 
 like us in all things, except sin. My only hope of 
 eternal salvation is on this ground ; nor do I believe 
 there has ever been any other possible way of salva- 
 tion, but that of a real conception and birth of the 
 divinity in man." This passage was omitted in the 
 
88 job scott's views. [1793. 
 
 first edition of his Journal published id New York in 
 1707; but having obtained publicity in England, 
 through a letter of Ann Tul fterwards Ann Al< 
 ancler,) who attended him in hia last sickness, it v 
 severely criticised by Borne, and defended by John 
 Be van, junior, in a work entitled, "A Defence of the 
 Christian Doctrines of the Society of Friends against 
 the charge of Socinianism." ' The doctrine embraced 
 in the foregoing extract, being treated ofveryfully in 
 the writings of Job Scott, tl (lowing pasE s 
 selected from his works, are deemed appropriafc . 
 "Some zealous trinitarian may think me as wick 
 
 the dews thought ( 'hri-t. my Lord and Saviour, and 
 
 be ready to pronounce me as they did him, a bli 
 phemer for thus exposing the sandy inundation on 
 which that Babel • infusion, th< i of 
 
 the trinity is boilt And did I not believe that God 
 is determined to Pound the wisdom of the wis . I 
 should greatly marvel that wise and Bober men <>\' 
 every religious name in Christendom have not lone 
 i united in exploding such a monster of absurdity. 
 " Christ as he is God is the same with the Father, 
 and no more a distinct person from him, than God 
 light, and God as love, is two distinct fountains; 
 one of light, the other of love. Bence with the strict- 
 est propriety his name is, and ought to be, ' The ever- 
 Lasting Father. 1 X'<v. if he is tl,. rlastingFat] 
 
 1 Published in London, 1805. 
 
 ■ "On the Knowledge of the Lord/ 1 &c. ; Wbrka of Job Scat, 
 ILp.298. The original MSS. of J : n. comprising this 
 and another entitled " Salvation by Chrisi getber with 
 
 "Journal," and many other writings, were placed by his father- 
 in-law and children in the hands of John Comly, by whom they 
 e published In two volumes, octavo, in th< L831. 
 
1793.] job scott's views. 89 
 
 who can distinguish him from the Father, or make 
 him a distinct person ? Observe well, that I speak of 
 Christ n<»\v as he is < rod." 
 
 "The Word was God, and this word took flesh, 
 according to that testimony, 'Lo! I come, a body 
 hast thou prepared me.' Here is both he that came, 
 the eternal Word, and the body that was prepared for 
 him. lie told Philip, 'lie that hath seen me hath 
 'i the Father also.' Barely many saw that outward 
 I iy. who did not see the Father, hut all who saw 
 through the veil, so as to have a lull view and el 
 
 sighl of him. lor whom the body was prepared, bim 
 
 who came to do the Fat: will in that body, saw 
 
 the Father. 
 
 "*Mv Father,' -aid he *i< greater than I.' Here 
 speaks of himself in a different resped from what 
 
 he did in saying, ' I and my Father are one.' Why 
 will the wisdom of man through ages strive so hard 
 
 to tix the crown [head on flesh and blood '( Did 
 
 not Jesns tell of a day and hour, of which neither the 
 
 angels nor the Bon himself knew, hut the Father 
 
 only': Surely Christ, the holy Word, that was and is 
 God, know.-, and always did know all thing If he 
 
 knew not something which yel the Father did know, 
 then he could not be God. Bencewe may safely con- 
 clude, that by the Bon which he here says knew not, 
 
 he meant the same as when he said, 'My Father is 
 
 greater than I,' hut it is certain there Lb no greater or 
 Less in < tod nor any lack of knowL ."' l 
 
 •The death and Bufferings of Christ iii that body 
 
 are at price iii tie :it of ( Jo, I. and in all 
 
 things have the pre-eminence in the views of the 
 
 1 Works of Job Scott, II. 302, 303. 
 8* w 
 
90 job scott's views. [1793. 
 
 saints. Therein was wonderfully held forth the way 
 of salvation, as a work of God in man and of man by 
 God; that it is all through suffering; a wounding to 
 heal, and a killing to make alive in God. He. the 
 Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, 1 
 always borne the chastisement of our peace ; nor with- 
 out his stripes were any ever healed. God hath laid 
 on him the iniquities of us all, but unless we partake 
 in the chastisement and feel his stripes, wo are not 
 healed ; for he that will save his life shall lose it : hut 
 he that will lose his life and die with Christ, shall 
 save it unto li: rnal. Ever of old, 'in all their 
 
 afflictions he was afflicted, and the angel of his pre- 
 sence saved them;' Isa. lxiii. !'. They had his real 
 presence, or all else had been useless; they w< 
 
 afflicted with him. as well as he with them, and tin 
 who know not reconciliation with God and remission 
 
 of sins in this way arc no1 reconciled to him. But 
 this is dvuth t<> man* % mill <ni<l wisdom too; he won't 
 endure it : he had rather believe <>r pretend to belii 
 
 anything than die into lite. His whole aim as man, 
 
 in his own activity in religion, is to climb up some 
 
 other way: and among his many inventions that he 
 may seem to come in by Christ, he has hewn out the 
 broken cistern of the imputation of Christ's right- 
 eousness to man in transgression ! But his righteous- 
 ness is forever unimputable to all who have not died 
 with him to sin, and risen in the power of his resur- 
 rection to newness of lite; it can be no further im- 
 puted to any, than they are actually conformed to his 
 
 death and the fellowship of his Bufferings. There is 
 an eternal distance and separation between Christ and 
 all that is unholy. No grain of his righteousness w 
 ever imputed to any soul, but in exact proportion to 
 
1800.] clarkson's portraiture. 91 
 
 its actual sanctiiieation or submission to the divine 
 will." 1 
 
 The high esteem in which Job Scott was held as a 
 minister of the gospel, both in Europe and America, 
 has been noticed in a preceding chapter of this his- 
 tory. He was called by Luke Howard, "a powerful 
 preacher, though but a mystical divine." % His mys- 
 ticism was of the same stamp as that of Isaac Pen- 
 nington, — ik a scribe instructed unto the kingdom of 
 heaven," who " brought forth out of his treasures, 
 things new and old." 
 
 About the beginning of the present century, Thos. 
 Clarkson published his "Portraiture of Quakerism," 
 • a work that was well received by Friends in England 
 and America, extensively circulated, and presented 
 by members of the Society to many distinguished 
 persons, including some of the crowned heads of 
 Europe.' For many years, while advocating the abo- 
 lition of the slave-trade, Clarkson had been brought 
 
 into close intimacy with some of the mosl intelligent 
 
 Friends in England, and was thus made acquainted 
 with the religion- views that generally prevailed 
 among them in the latter part of the 18th century. 
 
 After showing that the work of Creation, the illu- 
 mination of the mind, and the redemption of the soul, 
 are in the Scriptures attributed alike to the spirit of 
 
 1 " Salvation by Christ," Job Scott's Works, Vol. I. p. 488. 
 
 8 Luke Howard, the editor <>f " The Y<>rk^hireman," was a man 
 of parr-- and learning, ami at one time an influential Friend, much 
 employed in meeting affairs. He was very orthodox, and in 1837 
 
 Deluded he could no longer "walk together" with the Society 
 of Friends. lie then submitted to the rite of water baptism, and 
 communed with another church. 
 
 3 The Yorkshireman, II. 334. 
 
92 CLARKSOX'S PORTRAITURE. [1800. 
 
 God and to Christ, Clarkson proceeds to state as the 
 doctrine of Friends, "That Christ in all the offices 
 stated in the proposition is neither more nor less than 
 the Spirit of God, there can surely be no doubt. In 
 looking at Christ, we are generally apt to view him 
 with carnal eyes. "We can seldom divest oureeh 
 of the idea of a body belonging to him, though this 
 was confessedly human, and can seldom consider him 
 as a pure principle or fountain of divine life and light 
 in men." 1 * * * * 
 
 "That Christ therefore, as he held the offices con- 
 tained in the proposition, was the Spirit of God. we 
 may pronounce from various view- which we may 
 
 take of him, all of which seem to lead Q8 t<> the same, 
 conclusion. And first let us look at Christ in the 
 scriptural light in which he has been held forth to as 
 in the fourth section of the seventh chapter, where 1 
 
 have explained the particular notions of the Quak 
 relative to the new birth. God may he considered 
 here as having produced, by means of hie Holy Spirit, 
 a birth of divine life in the soul of the l hody which 
 had been prepared,' and this birth was Christ But 
 'that which is born of the Spirit,' says St. John, ' 
 spirit.' The only question then will be as to the 
 magnitude of the Spirit thus produced. In answer to 
 this, St. John says, 'that God gave him not the spirit 
 by measure,' and St. Paul Bays the same thing: 'For 
 in him all the fulness of the godhead dwelt bodily.' 
 Now we can have no idea of a spirit without measure. 
 or containing the fulness of the godhead, but the 
 Spirit of God." 
 
 The disastrous controversy and separation among 
 
 i ■ — — — — 
 
 1 Vol. II. pp. 158, 161. New York ed. 1806. 
 
1801.] HANNAH BARNARD. 93 
 
 Friends in Ireland, which came to an end about the 
 beginning of this century, most probably had some 
 influence upon the doctrinal views of Friends in Eng- 
 land. It occurred at a time when there was, among 
 the most conservative minds, much anxiety to prevent 
 the inroads of skepticism and infidelity, which in 
 France had made great progress ; and so intent were 
 they in watching against these evils, that some were 
 Km] to the opposite extreme. The controversy related 
 chiefly to the historical part of the Old Testament, to 
 the uncovering of the head in time of public prayer, 
 and to the mode of solemnizing manias:* There 
 was, on the part of the disaffected members, too much 
 boldness and latitude of speculation, and too little 
 
 rard for the rules and advices of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing; while on the part of the conservative members, 
 there was a rigid administration of discipline, without 
 the evidence of that Christian meekness and restoring 
 love which alone can preserve " the unity of the Spirit 
 in the bond of peace." 1 
 
 Nearly the same remarks will apply to the doc- 
 trinal views of Hannah Barnard, and the course pur- 
 sued in dealing with her both in England and Amer- 
 ica. 2 The first charge made again.-t her in the London 
 Yearly Meeting of ministers and elders was, "for 
 maintaining opinions not consonant with those of 
 the Society, and especially concerning the divine 
 authority of the Jewish wars as stated in the Old 
 Testament." She said in her defence, that "she had 
 not called in question the truth of the facts stated 
 in the Scriptures relative to the Jewish wars; but 
 
 1 See History of Friends, Vol. IV. chap. 1. 
 8 See Hist, of Friends, Vol. IV. chap. 1. 
 
 W2 
 
94 JEWISH WARS. [1801. 
 
 thought they were mistaken in their belief that God 
 approved of their wars, or commanded them to 
 slaughter their enemies." She referred to the writ- 
 ings of Anthony Benezet to corroborate her views. 
 In his "Considerations on War," after quoting from 
 the Sermon on the Mount, he says: "Hence we have 
 reason to believe, that the injunction and allowance 
 granted to the Jews, of making war upon their 
 enemies and one upon another, was in consequence 
 of that hardness of heart, which prevailed amongst 
 them; and that this permission was granted from 
 the same motive as that mentioned by our Lord, 
 when the Jews were pleading the license given them 
 by Moses to put away their wives and marry other 
 women,". Mark x. 5. "For the hardness of your 
 hearts Moses wrote you this precept; but from the 
 beginning of the creation God made them male and 
 female — what therefore God hath joined together, 
 let no man pnt asunder." This, as well as war, 
 slavery, and other practices of the like nature, were 
 a violation upon that union, purity, and brotherly 
 love which subsisted in the beginning in the original 
 constitution of things, whilst man retained his pri- 
 mitive innocency. And that the spilling of human 
 blood was not acceptable in the eyes of perfect Pu- 
 rity, whom the apostle denominates under the appella- 
 tion of love, God is Love, appears from the prohibi- 
 tion laid upon king David, not to build an house 
 unto God on account of his having been concerned 
 in the destruction of his fellow-creatures, as himself 
 declared, 1 Chron. xxii. 8. "The word of the Lord 
 came to me saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, 
 and hast made great wars; thou shalt not build an 
 
1801.] JEWISH WARS. 95 
 
 house unto my name, because thou hast shed much 
 blood upon the earth in my sight." 
 
 There is no doubt that the tract from which this 
 passage has been extracted, was extensively circulated 
 in America, aud generally approved by Friends. In 
 approving these sentiments of Benezet, we cannot 
 suppose they intended to call in question the veracity 
 of Moses, who, in accordance with the ideas enter- 
 tained by his nation, attributed to the immediate action 
 or command of God, much that is now ascribed to 
 his providential government. When we speak of 
 Divine Providence, we mean the care and superin- 
 tendence which the Most High exercises over aJl 
 creatures and all events; allowing at the same time 
 full scope to the free agency of man. 
 
 In order to secure this free agency, without which 
 man could not be a responsible being, many things 
 are permitted to take place that are not right in 
 themselves; but even these, by the overruling of 
 Divine Providence, may be made to promote some 
 good purpose. The sacred writers never refer to an 
 overruling Providence, but ascribe events imme- 
 diately to God; thus the prophet Daniel declares a 
 great truth in these words: "The Most High ruleth 
 in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever 
 he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men." 
 
 It would seem by the opposition made to Hannah 
 Barnard, on the ground that she did not believe in 
 the rectitude of the Jewish wars, that the most in- 
 fluential Friends in England differed from Benezet, 
 and most of the American Friends, on this point. 
 It is worthy of note, that in the testimony of dis- 
 ownment issued against H. Barnard, by Hudson 
 Monthly Meeting, the Jewish wars were not men- 
 
96 instkuctiost of youth. [1809. 
 
 tioned; but the grounds of accusation were that she 
 called in question the authenticity of various parts 
 of the scriptures of truth both of the Old and New 
 Testament, and particularly that she did not unite 
 with the Society in acknowledging the truth of that 
 part which relates to the miracles and miraculous concep- 
 tion of Christ. 
 
 It has been remarked by Luke Howard, that the 
 case of Hannah Barnard was "one of the first occa- 
 sions of calling the attention of our Society more 
 closely than at an} r former period, to the doctrines 
 preached among us, and to the Scriptural proofs of 
 Christian doctrine in general." 1 
 
 In the Yearly Meeting held in London in 1805, it 
 was stated by the committee on epistles, that there 
 was, in the Society, great remissness in the instruc- 
 tion of youth in the principles of the Christian reli- 
 gion. The further consideration of the subject was 
 postponed to the next Yearly Meeting, and then it 
 was referred to the Meeting for Sufferings, with a 
 suggestion that, as a first step, a small work be pre- 
 pared by way of question and answer for the use of 
 children at an early age. In pursuance of these 
 directions, a small tract (24 pages, 12mo.) entitled 
 "Earl} 7 Christian Instruction in the form of a Dia- 
 logue between a Mother and a Child," was presented 
 to the Yearly Meeting in 1807, and, after being re- 
 vised by the committee on epistles, was adopted by 
 the meeting and distributed to the families of Friends. 
 
 This being avowedly only the first step in the pro- 
 posed measure of Christian instruction, the Meeting 
 for Sufferings kept the subject under its notice, and 
 
 1 The Yorkshireman, V. 28, 
 
1803.] THE TRINITY. 97 
 
 after deliberating two years upon it, reported to the 
 Yearly Meeting in 1809, "that it had, at different 
 sittings, had under its revision a draught of a cate- 
 chism, to which it had given great attention, and pro- 
 posed various amendments; but doubts whether it 
 may be expedient for any work of this description, 
 which enters very minutely into questions of doctrine, to 
 be issued in the name of the Yearly Meeting." This 
 report being accepted by the Yearly Meeting, the 
 subject was dismissed and the proposed manual of 
 doctrinal instruction abandoned. 1 
 
 In the early part of this century, a controversy was 
 for several vears carried on between some of the 
 Friends in England on the Doctrines of the Trinity, 
 and the Divinity of Christ. Thomas Foster, writing 
 under the name of Verax, published in the year 1801, 
 "An Appeal to the Society of Friends on the pri- 
 mitive simplicity of their Christian principles." In 
 the following year a reply, supposed to be written by 
 Joseph Gurney Bevan, was published under the 
 signature of Vindex. And a rejoinder by Verax 
 appeared in the year 1803, entitled "A Vindication 
 of Scriptural Unitarian ism," &c. 
 
 Thomas Foster in his "Vindication," says: "That 
 I consider our early Friends to have been generally 
 Unitarians, I readily admit, and notwithstanding 
 there is considerable ambiguity in their writings, 
 the scale of evidence has always appeared to me to 
 preponderate decidedly in favor of that opinion. 
 They were no doubt, as even Vindex allows William 
 Penn to have been at all times, ' deeply impressed 
 with the importance of holding up the doctrine of 
 
 1 The Yorkshireman, V. 97, 98. 
 IV — 9 
 
98 THE TEINITY. [1803. 
 
 the complete unity of the Deity.' The consistent 
 acknowledgment and reverent belief of this truly scrip- 
 tural and primitive doctrine, is pure and simple uni- 
 tarianism. It is in this sense only, I have used the 
 phrase, as descriptive of the sentiments of our early 
 Friends. ,, 
 
 " That they ' denied the eternal Divinity of Christ,' 
 in the sense in which they used those terms, I am so 
 far from having asserted, that I have given some of 
 the strongest of their expressions in favor of that 
 doctrine. But as with the voice of one man, they 
 rejected all distinction of personality in the Deity ; 
 if they affixed any definite or consistent idea to the 
 terms they used on the subject, it must surely have 
 been their intention to ascribe supreme divinity to 
 God the Father only, the uncreated cause of all 
 things. It has been judiciously observed, respecting 
 our early Friends, 'That on the subject of Christ, 
 they sheltered themselves behind the broad shield of 
 allegor}^, and thus did not clearly discriminate be- 
 tween Christ as a person and Christ as a principle. 
 And this led to great ambiguity of expression in them, 
 and their successors down to the present day. Under 
 the idea of possessing a sound sentiment, clear to 
 their own conceptions, many of them have personi- 
 fied the spirit of divine illumination under the name 
 of Christ, or Christ within, or, in other words, Christ 
 as a principle.' 
 
 "I apprehend it was the oneness of this principle 
 with God, which our early Friends alone considered 
 as properly divine and an object of worship." ■ 
 
 In 1805, "A Defence of the Christian Doctrines of 
 
 1 T. Foster's Narrative, &c. London, 1813, p. 192. 
 
1805.] friends' doctrines. 99 
 
 the Society of Friends against the charge of Socin- 
 ianism," &c, by John Bevans, Jur., was published 
 in London. In this work, the views of Thomas 
 Foster are controverted, in order to show that the 
 early Friends were not Unitarians, and the impression 
 is attempted to be conveyed, that they were in fact 
 believers in the Trinity. Thus he says : " They, how- 
 ever, not only believed in the Trinity, notwithstand- 
 ing their objections to the metaphysical terms of the 
 schools, but they also have in the most undisguised 
 terms expressed their belief in the Divinity of Christ. 
 As to the insinuation of Verax, that ' there is con- 
 siderable ambiguity in their writings,' and ' that on 
 the subject of Christ they sheltered themselves be- 
 hind the broad shield of allegory ; and thus did not 
 discriminate between Christ as a person and Christ 
 as a principle;' I reject it as false, and inconsistent 
 with that 'manly boldness' wherewith, as he else- 
 where says, they avowed their sentiments." l 
 
 Those who are conversant with the writings of 
 Friends published in the time of Geo. Fox, know, 
 that they not only objected to the terms used in 
 denning the Trinity, as three persons; but they re- 
 jected the idea intended to be conveyed. " There 
 are many names," wrote Isaac Pennington, "but 
 the thing is one. The life, the power, the wisdom in 
 the Father, Son, and Spirit is all one : yea, they 
 themselves are one, perfectly one, not at all divided 
 or separated ; but where the Father is, the Son is ; 
 and where the Son is, the Spirit is ; and where the 
 Spirit is there is both the Father and the Son, who 
 tabernacle in man in the day of the gospel." 2 
 
 1 Defence, &c, p. 36. 2 Works of I. P., I. 693. 
 
100 friends' doctrines. [1809. 
 
 Although John Bevans may have been right in 
 denying that the early Friends "sheltered themselves 
 behind the broad shield of allegory," yet it is unques- 
 tionably true that they did write of " Christ in us, or 
 the Seed," as & principle. "By this," says Barclay, "we 
 understand a spiritual, heavenly, and invisible prin- 
 ciple, in which God, as Father, Son, and Spirit, dwells, 
 a measure of which divine and glorious life is in all 
 men as a seed which of its own nature draws, invites, 
 and inclines to God." 1 
 
 W. Penn says of Geo. Fox: "In his testimony or 
 ministry he much labored to open truth to people's 
 understandings, and to bottom them upon the prin- 
 ciple and principal, Christ Jesus, the Light of the 
 world; that by bringing them to something that was 
 from God in themselves, they might the better know 
 and judge of him and themselves." 2 Again, he says 
 of the Friends : " Their testimony was to the prin- 
 ciple of G-od in man." * * * * Numerous passages 
 to this effect may be found in his works and other 
 writings of the early Friends. "Principle, in a gen- 
 eral sense," is denned by Webster as, "the cause, 
 source, or origin of any thing." And we may affirm 
 that Christ, as the divine Word, is the origin of all 
 things. Principal, the chief or head, is also a term 
 that may properly be applied to Christ, as the "first- 
 born among many brethren," — the head of the 
 
 Church. 
 
 In the year 1809, a treatise by Rd. Phillips, en- 
 titled " Hints chiefly Scriptural respecting Regenera- 
 tion," was published in London after receiving the 
 
 1 Apology, Prop. V. and VI. \ 13. 
 
 2 Rise and Progress. Select Works, p. 275. 
 
1812.] friends' doctrines. 101 
 
 usual sanction of the Society. It is said to be almost 
 exactly in accordance with the views of Job Scott, as 
 expressed in his work called "Salvation by Christ." 
 He closes one branch of his argument with these 
 words, viz. : " From what has been said respecting 
 the new birth or regeneration, it appears that there 
 is no other way of salvation, than by a real conception 
 and birth of the divine nature in man." 
 
 In the year 1812, Ratcliff Monthly Meeting issued 
 a Testimony of disownment, from which the follow- 
 ing extract is taken : "It having been represented to. 
 this meeting that Thomas Foster, one of its mem- 
 bers, had imbibed and aided in propagating some 
 opinions contrary to the principles of our Society, and 
 that private labor had been unavailingly extended, a 
 committee was appointed to visit him thereon, who 
 have had several interviews with him, and from their 
 report it appears, that he has joined a society who 
 publicly avow their disbelief of the eternal divinity 
 of Jesus Christ our Lord ; that he has circulated some 
 anonymous papers, entitled 'Kemarks on the Qua- 
 kers' Yearly Epistle,' calculated to promote such senti- 
 ments; and that he is publicly stated to be the author 
 of some publications under the assumed name of 
 Ye rax, (which he does not deny,) apparently intended 
 to prove that doctrine to have been held and sup- 
 ported by our early Friends. 1 Against this decision, 
 Thomas Foster appealed to the Quarterly Meeting 
 for London and Middlesex, and the disownment 
 being there confirmed, he appealed to the Yearly 
 Meeting of London." 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, who was one of the Yearly 
 
 1 Foster's Narrative, &c. London, 1813, p. 112. 
 9* IV — X 
 
102 friends' doctrines. [1812. 
 
 Meeting's Committee on Appeals, has left an account 
 of this case. He says : "In the year 1814, l Thomas 
 Foster, a man of talent and education, was disowned 
 by the Monthly Meeting of RatclirT, for subscribing 
 to the Unitarian Booh Society. He had long been sup- 
 posed to entertain low views of the person of Christ ; 
 and had he kept those views to himself, he would 
 probably have been left by Friends to pursue his own 
 course. But no sooner did he publicly assist in the 
 diffusion of them, than he became from this overt 
 act, a proper object of the discipline of the Society, 
 and accordingly lost his membership." Joseph John 
 Gurney, after stating that he, as clerk of the com- 
 mittee, drew up a series of resolutions which ter- 
 minated with one confirming the disownment, thus 
 continues : " Our unanimity being ascertained by the 
 signatures of the whole committee, our report con- 
 firming the disownment was presented to the Yearly 
 Meeting. Against our decision Thomas Foster, as in 
 right entitled to do, made his final appeal to the body 
 at large, consisting of about 1200 men Friends of 
 various ages and conditions, without any written creed, 
 and without any human president. Then, indeed, 
 came on the trial of the Society's faith, the great 
 question being immediately before us, whether Or- 
 thodox Christianity or Unitarianism was the belief 
 of Friends. The appellant's speech was long and in- 
 sinuating, calculated to amuse the young and perplex 
 the old. The reply of the respondents was plain and 
 luminous, and accompanied by abundant evidence 
 selected from the writings of the early Friends, of 
 
 1 It should be 1812. The Yearly Meeting's decision was in 
 1814. 
 
1814.] FKIEXDS' DOCTRINES. 103 
 
 the uniform adherence of the Society to the doctrines 
 
 t/ 
 
 of the Deity and atonement of Christ." 1 * * * * 
 The judgment of the Quarterly Meeting was con- 
 firmer], many of the most influential Friends, and 
 some of the younger class, expressing their approval. 
 
 The respondents, on behalf of the Quarterly Meet- 
 ing, near the close of their reply, expressed the follow- 
 ing sentiments: " As to the appellant's assurance that 
 he fully believes all that Christ is recorded in the ~Rew 
 Testament to have said concerning himself and his 
 doctrines, it is not for us to assert the contrary ; but 
 it is plain that he differs from us as to the sense in 
 which many important texts of Scripture are to be 
 understood. A profession of agreement with all the 
 doctrines laid down in the Scriptures, is not a suffi- 
 cient bond of union ; for all Protestants profess to 
 appeal to the Scriptures in defence of their various 
 and opposite principles; and we might as well retain 
 persons in membership who hold that oaths and war 
 are lawful to Christians, as those who do not believe 
 in the eternal divinity of that poiver which dwelt in Christ 
 Jesus." 2 This expression seems to refer to the charge 
 made against him by Ratcliff Monthly Meeting, con- 
 cerning a " disbelief of the eternal divinity of Jesus 
 Christ our Lord." 
 
 Thomas Foster insisted that he never hesitated to 
 acknowledge the eternal divinity of that Power which 
 dwelt in Christ Jesus, for " all divine power strictly 
 speaking is eternal." "It was not this," he says, 
 
 1 Life of J. J. Gurney, Phila. ed. 1855, I. 108. 
 
 2 It is proper to inform the reader that this paragraph is reported 
 liy Thos. Foster, who took notes of the respondents' reply. They 
 declined to give him a copy or to examine his notes. See Foster's 
 Sequel to an Appeal. London, 1816, y. 65. 
 
104 DOCTRINAL VIEWS OF THE ENGLISH FRIENDS. 
 
 "but the eternal divinity and omnipotence of Jesus 
 Christ, which my accusers and judges disowned me 
 for not holding, as their own records will prove. And 
 that too, refusing to say whether they meant to apply 
 those terms to the man Christ Jesus, or to that divine 
 power which dwelt in him ; nor have I been since 
 informed during any part of the discussion." ' 
 
 The course pursued by the English Friends in this 
 case, contrasts remarkably with the liberality of the 
 English Methodists in relation to the celebrated Adam 
 Clarke. He dissented from the orthodox creed, and 
 from the opinions of his fellow-laborers in the minis- 
 try, in relation to "the eternal sonship of Christ," yet 
 he continued in unity with the Society, and at his 
 death "the conference honored him in its minutes as 
 ' one of the great men of his age.' " 2 
 
 Prior to this date, the difference of sentiment on 
 doctrinal subjects, that undoubtedly existed to some 
 extent among Friends, was less obvious, because they 
 usually expressed themselves in scriptural terms ; but 
 about this period there appeared an increasing dispo- 
 sition to examine and discuss those theological ques- 
 tions which have so often agitated the Christian world. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 DOCTRINAL VIEWS OF THE ENGLISH FRIENDS. 
 
 In England, the religious views entertained by Luke 
 Howard, John Bevans, William Forster, Josiah Fors- 
 
 1 Foster's Sequel to an Appeal. London, 1816, p. 65. 
 9 Steven's History of Methodism, III. 266, 475. 
 
DOCTRINAL VIEWS OF THE ENGLISH FRIENDS. 105 
 
 ter, George Withey, Jonathan Hutchinson, Lindley 
 Murray, Joseph John Gurney, Elizabeth Fry, Anna 
 Braithwait, and many other influential Friends, were 
 of the stamp usually called orthodox ; that is to say, 
 they favored or fully embraced the doctrines of the 
 Anglican Church in relation to the Trinity, original 
 sin, vicarious atonement, and imputed righteousness. 
 
 Among this class of Friends, whose influence was 
 very effective in the Yearly Meeting of London, Joseph 
 John Gurney may be considered the representative 
 man, inasmuch as his discourses and writings have 
 contributed more than those of any other person to 
 mould the opinions of Friends in Great Britain. His 
 native talents, intellectual culture, high social position, 
 extensive charities, and sincere piety, entitled him to 
 great consideration ; but his education under a cleri- 
 cal preceptor at Oxford, and his subsequent intimacy 
 with bishops and rectors of the established Church, 
 had a tendency to withdraw his attention from the 
 writings of Friends, and to imbue his mind with those 
 doctrines which, in England, are called evangelical. 
 
 The ability evinced in expounding his views and 
 his candor in avowing them, render the study of his 
 works the most direct method of ascertaining the doc- 
 trines held by influential Friends in England. That 
 the sentiments expressed in his published works were 
 generally coincident with those entertained by lead- 
 ing minds in the Yearly Meeting of London, may be 
 concluded from the fact that his standing in the So- 
 ciety remained unimpaired, and his labors in the 
 ministry w r ere sanctioned by certificates expressive of 
 unity. 
 
 On the publication, in 1825, of his "Essays on 
 Christianity," the most elaborate of all his works, and 
 
 X2 
 
106 DOCTRINAL VIEWS OF THE ENGLISH FRIENDS. 
 
 the most thoroughly orthodox, according to the stand- 
 ard of the Church of England, he received letters of 
 congratulation and approval, not only from the bishop 
 of Norwich and other distinguished churchmen, but 
 from members of his own religious society, among 
 whom were William Forster, Jonathan Hutchinson, 
 and Lindley Murray, prominent members of London 
 Yearly Meeting. " It would be strange," said \Vm. 
 Forster, "if I did not feel more than a common and 
 passing interest in the work ; for I think I never found 
 myself upon any occasion so much anticipated; it 
 gives utterance to my own views and feelings in such 
 lucid and convincing language, and withal, it solves 
 some of my difficulties so thoroughly and satisfacto- 
 rily." Jonathan Hutchinson wrote: "I have lately 
 finished a very deliberate reading of thy Essays, and 
 on the whole with a satisfaction that enables me hon- 
 estly to say, that I am glad to have seen such a book 
 before I die." And Lindley Murray expressed his 
 approbation thus emphatically : " Thou hast indeed by 
 this pious labor very materially served the cause of 
 truth and righteousness." * 
 
 It must not be understood, however, that Friends 
 in Great Britain were unanimous in approving his 
 works ; there were, doubtless, many who dissented 
 from some of his views, but they were either in a 
 minority in the Yearly Meeting, or of a class who 
 had not sufficient influence to stem the popular 
 current. 
 
 In order to compare the doctrines of J. J. Gurney, 
 and others of his class, with the writings of the early 
 Friends, the subjects or points to be examined will 
 
 1 Memoirs of J. J. Gurney. Phila. ed. pp. 306, 308. 
 
IMMEDIATE REVELATION. 107 
 
 be taken up in the same order as stated in the first 
 five chapters of this treatise, and reference will be 
 made to the several sections of those chapters for 
 proofs and illustrations. 
 
 IMMEDIATE REVELATION. 
 
 § 1. It has been shown in Chap. I. § 9 and 10, 
 "That God has given to every man a measure of the 
 light of his Son, a measure of grace, or a measure 
 of the Spirit, by which he calls, exhorts, and strives 
 with every man in order to save him." This saving 
 power is called by Barclay "an evangelical principle 
 of light and life wherewith Christ hath enlightened 
 every man that cometh into the world." Apology, 
 Prop. VI. 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, alluding to the fall of Adam, 
 writes as follows: "But degraded as man is under 
 the baneful influence of this mournful event, God 
 has been pleased to bestow upon him, in all ages, 
 those 'reproofs of instruction,' which 'are the way 
 of life.' Prov. vi. 23. He has graciously communi- 
 cated to us a law, by which we may so regulate our 
 conduct in the world as to obtain happiness, .both 
 here and hereafter. It will, I presume, be without 
 difficulty allowed, that these observations are in a 
 general, yet very important, sense, applicable to all 
 men, whether they are partakers in the benefit of an 
 outward revelation, or are left to that which is usually 
 described as the light of nature" After quoting from 
 Romans ii. 13-15, proving that the Gentiles " show 
 the work of the law written in their hearts, their 
 consciences bearing witness, and their thoughts the 
 meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another," 
 he continues as follows: "Thus it appears that there 
 
108 IMMEDIATE REVELATION. 
 
 were individuals in ancient times, destitute of an out- 
 ward revelation, who nevertheless obeyed the will 
 of our Heavenly Father as it is made manifest in 
 the heart, — persons who were taught of God to fear 
 him and to 'work righteousness;' and on the other 
 hand the multitude of the gentiles, who gave them- 
 selves up to idolatrous and other vicious practices, 
 were condemned for this very reason, that they sin- 
 ned against the light of nature ; and both practised 
 and promoted iniquity, although they knew the 
 'judgment (or the righteous decision) of God, that 
 they which commit such things are worthy of death.' " l 
 
 Again, he writes: "God has written his moral 
 law on the hearts of all men; or, in other words, has 
 interwoven a sense of it with their very nature." 2 * * * * 
 
 These passages which describe the law written in 
 the heart, as the light of nature, and as being inter- 
 vowen with mans very nature, are not consistent with 
 the doctrines of Fox, Penn, and Barclay, already 
 quoted; for these writers describe that inward law, 
 to which the conscience bears witness, as "the grace 
 of God which hath appeared to all men," — "the light 
 of Christ within, as God's gift for man's salvation." 
 Chap. I. § 9 and 10. 
 
 It must be observed, however, in justice to J. J. 
 Gurney, that he is not, in this instance, consistent 
 with himself, for he has, elsewhere, acknowledged 
 that the law written in the heart proceeds from the 
 Holy Spirit. 
 
 Thus he says, in reference to "the immediate and 
 perceptible operation of the Spirit," * * * * "T 
 have in the first place plainly to declare my belief in 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, London ed. 1825, pp. 516, 517. 
 
 2 Ibid. 558. 
 
IMMEDIATE REVELATION. 109 
 
 unison with that of Friends from their first rise to 
 the present da}', that the influence of the Holy Spirit 
 is very far from being confined to those who have a 
 knowledge of Holy writ, and of the incarnate, cru- 
 cified, and risen Saviour of whom it testifies. On 
 the contrary, it is my firm conviction, that as Christ 
 died for all men, so all men, through his mediation 
 and sacrifice on the cross, are placed in a capacity 
 of salvation and receive a measure of divine light, 
 which, although in numberless instances shining ' in 
 darkness,' and overborne by ignorance and supersti- 
 tion, is in its own nature pure and holy, and per- 
 ceptible to the rational mind of man — so that those 
 who believe in it, and obey it, are thereby led to fear 
 God and to keep his law as it is written in their 
 hearts ; that such as these are accepted for Christ's 
 sake, even though they may never have heard his 
 name; and thus sharing in the benefit of his atoning 
 death on the cross, through faith in the degree of 
 light bestowed upon them, they are to be regarded 
 as partakers in their measure, and according to their 
 capacity, of the body and blood of our Lord and Saviour 
 Jesus Christ." 1 
 
 TThat he means by partaking of the body and 
 blood of Christ he elsewhere explains as follows : 
 " As eating the bread of life is identical with believ- 
 ing in Christ the incarnate Son of God, so eating his 
 flesh is identical with such a belief in him as is espe- 
 cially directed to his atoning sacrifice." The obvious 
 question arises, How can those believe, in this man- 
 ner, who "never have heard of his name ?" 
 
 1 J. J. G's Declaration of Faith, Phila. ed. 1847, p. 8. 
 10 
 
110 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 § 2. In the second chapter of this treatise (sect. 1) 
 it has been shown that the first imprisonment of 
 George Fox resulted from his denying the commonly 
 received doctrine, that, by the Scriptures were to be 
 tried "all doctrines, religions, and opinions." He 
 told the people, it was "the Holy Spirit by which 
 the holy men of God gave forth the Scriptures, 
 whereby opinions, religions, and judgments were to 
 be tried." And Eobert Barclay says of the Scrip- 
 tures, "because they are only a declaration of the 
 fountain 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." They are "a secondary 
 rule subordinate to the Spirit, from which they have 
 all their excellency and certainty." "The letter of 
 the Scriptures is outward of itself a dead thing, a 
 mere declaration of good things, but not the things 
 themselves, therefore it neither is or can be the chief 
 or 'principal rule of Christians." § 2. Nevertheless, 
 the early Friends acknowledged the authenticity and 
 divine authority of the Scriptures, and expressed 
 their willingness that "all their doctrines and prac- 
 tices should be tried by them;" but they believed 
 that none could rightly understand and interpret 
 them without the aid of the Holy Spirit, "which is 
 the first and principal leader." § 2 and 4. 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, in some passages of his writ- 
 ings, assigns to the Scriptures the principal, instead 
 of the secondary place_, in the illumination and con- 
 version of the soul. Thus, he writes: "In the fulfil- 
 ment of the written prophecy ; in the wisdom of the 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. Ill 
 
 written doctrine; in the purity of the written law — 
 in the harmony of the contents of the Bible, and 
 almost endless variety — and in its efficacy, as the prin- 
 cipal means employed by divine Providence for the 
 illumination, conversion, and spiritual edification of 
 men — the inquirer cannot fail to perceive unquestion- 
 able indications of the divine origin of Holy Writ." 1 
 
 " Whatsoever in the preachings or writings of 
 modern Christians, has any tendency to convert, purify, 
 and save the souls of men, never fails to be found in 
 its original form, in the Bible." 2 
 
 " The moral law as revealed in Scripture, partakes 
 of the character of its Author : first, because it pre- 
 scribes the practice of every virtue, and is therefore 
 holy, just, and good ; and secondly, because it is 
 spiritual, insinuates itself into the heart, reaching 
 the spirit, and convincing the understanding. It 
 applies to all circumstances, comprehends all condi- 
 tions, regulates all motives, directs and controls all 
 overt acts." 3 
 
 " The Bible which alone fully reveals the nature 
 and character of sin, expressly declares that all men 
 have sinned and are guilty in the sight of God. 
 Although it is chiefly from the light of Scripture that 
 we obtain a knowledge of this doctrine, we are quite 
 certain now that we have obtained it, that the doc- 
 trine is true." 4 
 
 Compare these passages with the language of Geo. 
 Fox. "I directed them to the divine light of Christ 
 and his Spirit in their hearts, which would let them 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, p. 543. 
 
 2 Portable Evidence, Phila. ed. 1856, p. 14. 
 
 3 Ibid. 46. 4 Ibid. 126. 
 
112 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 see all their evil thoughts, words, and action?, that 
 they had thought, spoken, and acted ; by which light 
 they might see their sin, and also their Saviour Christ 
 Jesus to save them from their sins." ■ This accords 
 with the declaration of Christ, concerning the Com- 
 forter or Spirit of Truth, "He will reprove the world 
 of sin." 
 
 It has been shown in chap. II. § 1, that Geo. Fox 
 regarded the "more sure word of prophecy," spoken 
 of by Peter, (2 Pet. i. 10.) not as the Scriptures, but 
 as the Holy Spirit. The same view is thus expressed 
 by Robert Barclay : " As for the more sure word of 
 prophecy, we grant it to be the rule; but deny that 
 that more sure word is the Scriptures, hut it is that 
 word in the heart from which the Scriptures came and 
 in and by which the Scriptures are to be inter- 
 preted." 2 This view is also supported by the writ- 
 ings of Wm. Penn and Geo. Whitehead. 
 
 Joseph John Gurney. in his "Brief Remarks on 
 Impartiality in the Interpretation of Scripture," 
 writes as follows: "The idea was at one time rather 
 prevalent among the members of our Society that 
 when the Apostle used the term, 'a more sure word 
 of prophecy,' he was alluding not to any thing writ 
 ten, but to that divine illuminating influence by 
 which the prophets were inspired, and which guide? 
 the Christian believer into all truth. Such a view of 
 the passage is indeed but seldom insisted on at the 
 present day; but as it is still sometimes advanced, I 
 think it right to acknowledge my own sentiment that 
 
 1 Journal of G. Fox, Vol. I. 187. 
 
 2 Truth cleared of Calumnies. Barclay's Works, London, 1692, 
 p. 17. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 113 
 
 it is at variance with that simplicity which we ought 
 alwavs to maintain in the interpretation of the sacred 
 writings. That the very 'sure word of prophecy,' 
 which had been uttered and teas written, is here meant, 
 is evident from the immediate context, in which the 
 Apostle distinguishes this word from the day-star 
 which arises in the heart, and at the same time iden- 
 tifies it (as I conceive) with prophecy of the Scrip- 
 tures." 
 
 A still more important difference between the doc- 
 trinal views of J. J. Gurney and those of the early 
 Friends relates to the acceptation of the word gospel 
 as used in the Xew Testament. It signifies literally 
 glad tidings, and by Geo. Fox and his coadjutors 
 was understood to mean " the power of God unto 
 salvation to every one that believeth." [Rom. i. 16.) 
 And which Paul Bays, "came not in word only but 
 also in power." (1 The*, i. 5.) 
 
 Geo. Fox writes in his Journal: "I was .-peaking 
 in the meeting, that the gospel was the power of God, 
 and how it brought life and immortality to light in 
 men." ■ At another time he declared that the gospel 
 was the power of God, which was preached before 
 Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, or any of them 
 were printed or written ; aud it was preached in every 
 creature ; of which a great part might never see nor 
 hear of those four books." 2 
 
 Isaac Pennington held the same doctrine; and 
 Robert Barclay has thus expressed it in his Apology, 
 (Prop. Y. and VI. § 23:) "This saving spiritual light is 
 the gospel, which the Apostle saith expressly is preached 
 in every creature under heaven; even that very gospel 
 
 1 Journal G. F., I. 1G0. a Ibid. Vol. II. p. 25. 
 
 10* Y 
 
114 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 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 salvation unto 
 all those that believe, Row. 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 in word, 
 power, and life, which preacheth glad tidings in the 
 hearts of all men, offering salvation unto them, and 
 seeking to redeem them from their iniquities, and 
 therefore it is said to be preached in every creature 
 under heaven : whereas there are many thousands of 
 men and women to whom the outward gospel was 
 never preached." 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, on the contrary, limits the 
 application of the term "gospel" to the records of 
 the New Testament. Thus, he says, in reference to 
 persons who have received outward instruction : 
 " Their case is not to be confounded with that of the 
 uninstructed heathen, who have never heard the truth. 
 To these, the gospel has been preached ; it is written 
 in the book of God for their instruction, and if they 
 reject it, they do so at their peril." 1 In reference to 
 regeneration, he writes: "In efTectimr this blessed 
 change in the affections of fallen man, the Holy 
 Spirit makes use of the gospel of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, as his grand appointed instrument. The 
 gospel written in the Holy Scriptures, and preached by 
 the Lord's messengers, 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." 2 After commenting on the 
 
 1 Portable Evidence, p. 164. 2 Essay on Love to God, p. 5. 
 
THE ORIGINAL AND PRESENT STATE OF MAN. 115 
 
 Scripture text, " I am not ashamed of the gospel of 
 Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation," he 
 thus continues : " It is surely much to be regretted, 
 that by some persons under our name, the passage on 
 which these remarks are offered has been misunder- 
 stood, and (without the smallest intention, as I 
 believe, to deviate from accurate truth,) wrested 
 from its obvious meaning. The declaration that 
 ' the gospel of Christ is the power of God unto sal- 
 vation,' has been regarded not as a description of 
 the efficacy of that gospel for the salvation of sinners, 
 but as a definition of the gospel itself, as if the 'gos- 
 pel of Christ' and the 'power of God' were con- 
 vertible terms. Hence it is that ' the gospel ' is not 
 the good news of salvation through a crucified 
 Saviour, but the 'power of God,' — or, in other 
 words, the influence of the Holy Spirit in the heart. 
 The tendency of this mistake to dismiss from our 
 view a most important and fundamental part of 
 Christian truth, — that very part on which all the 
 rest is built, — is too obvious to require notice." 1 
 
 THE ORIGINAL AND PRESENT STATE OF MAN. 
 
 § 3. In the third chapter of this treatise the doc- 
 trines of the early Friends in relation to the original 
 and present state of man were examined, and the fol- 
 lowing points established. First. That the doctrine 
 of original sin was not held by them, but was called 
 by Barclay " an invented and unscriptural barbarism." 
 " For if a son bear not the iniquity of his father, (Eze- 
 kiel xviii. 20,) or of his immediate parents, far less 
 
 1 Brief Remarks on Impartiality in. the Interpretation of Scrip- 
 ture. New York ed. p. 7. 
 
116 THE ORIGINAL AND PRESENT STATE OF MAN. 
 
 shall he bear the iniquity of Adam." Therefore no 
 sin is imputed to infants. § 2. Secondly. It was 
 shown that, according to Barclay, there is a seed of 
 sin propagated to all men, which inclines them to 
 iniquity, but it is only by joining with it, or yield- 
 ing to its influence, that men become sinners. § 3. 
 Thirdly. That the recorded experience and dying 
 expressions of some of the most prominent of the 
 early Friends shows that they did not believe they 
 were born in sin. § 4 and 5. Fourthly. They believed 
 a state of perfection or freedom from sin, attainable in 
 this life. §§ 8, 9, and 10. 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, alluding to the fall of Adam 
 and Eve, says : " Their original natural virtue was lost 
 forever; their bodies were condemned to death ; and 
 morally they were dead already, prone to wickedness, 
 and destitute of any power of their own to perform a 
 good action. Such is the condition of those persons 
 who are 'dead in trespasses and sins,' a condition 
 common by nature to all mankind. It is a proverb 
 familiar to reason as well as to religion, that no man 
 can 'bring a clean thing out of an unclean,' and the 
 Scriptures teach us that the moral condition of Adam 
 was transmitted to his descendants of all generations." l 
 Again he says in relation to the fall, it "was the im- 
 mediate cause of a moral degeneracy, and therefore 
 of sl punishable guilt in the whole family of his descend- 
 ants." 2 "The whole race of their descendants have 
 inherited a nature infected with sin, and prone to 
 evil." 3 "In consequence of this mournful change, 
 the whole race of their descendants inherit a sinful 
 
 1 Portable Evidences, 129. 
 
 2 Essays on Christianity. London, p. 209. 8 Ibid. p. 548. 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 117 
 
 nature,'" &C. 1 " We are by nature the children of 
 wrath. Prone to iniquity, and transgressors from the 
 womb, we are alienated from God who is the source of 
 all happiness ; and in the world to come, eternal sepa- 
 ration from Him, and therefore eternal misery is the 
 appointed consequence of our evil doings." 2 
 
 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 § 4. In the fourth chapter of this treatise, the doc- 
 trines of the early Friends concerning the Supreme 
 Being were exhibited. They may be recapitulated as 
 follows: First. They denied the doctrine of "The 
 Trinity of three distinct and separate persons in the 
 unity of essence." Chap. iv. § 2. Secondly. "They 
 believed in the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit 
 c as one Divine Being, one God blessed forever.' " § 3 
 and 4. Thirdly. They denied that the Holy Spirit is 
 a person distinct from the Father and the Son. § 5. 
 Fourthly. They believed in the Divinity of Christ, as 
 God manifest in the flesh ; they also acknowledged 
 his manhood, (the soul and body,) according to the 
 Scriptures. § 6. Fifthly. They maintained that the 
 Eternal word that was in the beginning with God and 
 was God, manifested himself as the "Spiritual rock" 
 that followed the Israelites in the wilderness, — as 
 "the Spirit of Christ" that spoke through the pro- 
 phets, — as the glory of the Lord that appeared to 
 Isaiah in the temple, — as the "only -begotten of the 
 Father " that took flesh, and dwelt in fulness, or without 
 measure, in Jesus of Xazareth, — and as the Comforter 
 or Spirit of Truth that comes " in the spirit and power 
 of the Most High "to " be with his disciples always to 
 the end of the world." § 7 and 8. Sixthly. They held 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity. London, p. 219. 2 Ibid. 510. 
 
 Y2 
 
118 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 that Jesus Christ is the head, or chief member of that 
 spiritual body, of which all are members who are born 
 of the spirit. Hence some of them spoke of him, "as 
 our most blessed and elder brother" who, " even as 
 mediator is ever in being in a most glorious state." 
 §§ 9, 10, 11. 
 
 Seventhly. They believed that Jesus Christ, the 
 head of the church, and the saints his members, in 
 their heavenly state, are not in carnal but in spiritual 
 bodies. §§ 11, 12, 13, 14. 
 
 Eighthly. That " since one outward thing cannot 
 be the proper figure or representative of another," 
 
 * * * * "then Christ's body, or what he had from 
 the virgin, strictly considered, was not the seed." § 16. 
 " The seed, ^race or word of God — the Light where- 
 with every one is enlightened — is "a spiritual, 
 heavenly and invisible principle, in which God, as 
 Father, Son, and Spirit, dwells, a measure of which 
 divine and glorious life is in all men as a seed, which 
 of its own nature draws, invites, and inclines to God." 
 
 * * * * "But by this," says Barclay, "we do not at 
 a]l intend to equal ourselves to that holy man, the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, who was born of the Virgin Mary* 
 in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily, 
 so neither do we destroy the reality of his present ex- 
 istence, as some have falsely calumniated us." § 17. 
 
 Ninthly. They acknowledged "The man Christ 
 Jesus " as the " one mediator between God and man," 
 who " received gifts for men " which were "first given 
 him of the Father." Yet, as Geo. Fox writes : " Xone 
 know him as a mediator and a lawgiver, nor an offer- 
 ing, nor his blood that cleanseth them, but as they 
 know him working in them." §§ 18, 19, 20. 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, while avoiding the use of the 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 119 
 
 term Trinity, held the doctrine of the Church of Eng- 
 land on this subject, attributing to Father, Son, and 
 Holy Spirit a distinct and separate personality. Thus 
 he writes: "I have never thought it right, either in 
 preaching or writing, to make use of this term, [Trin- 
 ity,] which is scholastic in its origin, and is liable to 
 misconstruction ; but I consider the doctrine itself, 
 though far beyond the reach of the natural under- 
 standing of man, to be plainly set forth in Scripture ; 
 and. so far am I from regarding it as merely theoreti- 
 cal in its nature, that I accept it as of the highest 
 practical importance in the experience of every be- 
 liever." 1 " Such is the scriptural evidence of which 
 we are in possession, that the Father is God, that the 
 Son is God, that the Holy Spirit is God. Having 
 considered this evidence, we may now proceed to take 
 a view of some additional passages of the New Testa- 
 ment, in which the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, 
 whose deity is thus distinctively and separately indicated, 
 are presented to our attention as the united sources 
 of the Christian's help and consolation, the united 
 objects of the Christian's belief and obedience. This 
 description is indeed applicable to the passages already 
 cited from the Gospel of John, in relation to the per- 
 sonality of the Holy Ghost: vide xiv. 26, xv. 26, xvi. 
 7, 8." 
 
 " With respect to the Holy Spirit, we must in the 
 first place direct our attention to those passages of 
 the Scripture in which he is described not merely 
 in his influence and operation, but in his personal 
 character." * * * * « The very pointed allusions 
 made by our Saviour to the personality of the Holy 
 
 1 A Declaration of his Faith by J. J. G. Phila. 1847, p. 19. 
 
120 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 Spirit are in exact accordance with the mode of ex- 
 pression which was often adopted in allusion to the 
 same subject by his inspired disciples. From various 
 passages in the Book of Acts, and the Epistles, we 
 can scarcely do otherwise than deduce the inference, 
 that these servants of the Lord regarded the Holy 
 Spirit as one possessing a personal authority, exer- 
 cising personal powers, and requiring a personal alle- 
 giance. "* 
 
 " Now if the inquiry be addressed to us, Who is 
 this person, of whom Christ and his apostles thus 
 bear witness?" * * * * "the fundamental principles 
 of our religion and the whole analogy of Scripture, 
 will assuredly admit but of one answer, This Person 
 is God." 2 
 
 "In order to complete our views of the Scriptural 
 evidences which bear upon the present subject, I 
 have now to observe, that, although this threefold dis- 
 tinction in the divine nature is the most clearly re- 
 vealed to us in the New Testament, yet there are 
 also various passages in the Sacred writings of the 
 ancient Hebrews, which appear to indicate a plurality 
 in the One God." 3 "On a careful perusal of the 
 whole of the sacred volume, he [the honest inquirer] 
 is led to take a view, first, of the natural and moral 
 attributes of the Supreme Being; secondly, of the 
 personality and unity in Him of the Father, the Son, 
 and the Spirit," &c. 4 
 
 In relation to the manhood of Jesus Christ, Joseph 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, 145, 148. 
 
 2 Essays, London ed. 1825. I am informed that in the 3d edi- 
 tion, these words [this Person] are omitted and the pronnin He 
 substituted. 
 
 8 Ibid. 153. 4 Ibid. 559. 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 121 
 
 John Gurney writes as follows: "His body was a 
 human body, and his mind a human mind; and 
 therefore we cannot with any reason refuse to allow, 
 that he was really and absolutely man." 
 
 "Now I conceive that no one who takes a just and 
 comprehensive view of these prophecies on the one 
 hand, and of the gospel narratives on the other, can 
 refuse to admit the doctrine of the real and proper 
 humanity of Jesus Christ." * * * * He "was unques- 
 tionably man — a creature of God, endued with a 
 human body and a human soul." 1 "If we admit 
 that Jesus of Nazareth was endued with a human 
 soul, (and where is the unsophisticated reader of the 
 four Gospels who will question the fact?) we must 
 also admit, on principles already recognized, that 
 after he expired on the cross his soul continued to 
 exist ; and continuing to exist, that soul was presently 
 reunited to his body, which was raised on earth and 
 glorified in heaven." 2 "Wonderful indeed are both 
 the equity and the love God has manifested in ordain- 
 ing that his rational children shall be judged by a 
 Person who in one point of view is their brother and 
 their peer." 3 
 
 This expression — their peer — though less reverential, 
 was probably meant to be understood in the same 
 sense as that of "our elder brother," found in the 
 writings of the early Friends. A peer is " an equal, 
 one of the same rank," 4 but the elder brother, in 
 the Jewish economy, was the heir of his father's au- 
 thority and the head of the tribe. So also, in the 
 aristocratic families of Europe, the eldest brother is 
 
 1 Essays, London ed. 1825, pp. 222, 258. 2 Essays, 323 
 
 3 Essays, London ed. 1825, p. 351. 4 Webster. 
 
 IV- 11 
 
122 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 the heir of the title and estate. The term peer, as 
 used by Gurney, is improperly applied. — "We do 
 not at all intend to equal ourselves," says Barclay, " to 
 that holy man the Lord Jesus Christ." 
 
 But this "Person" who is thus characterized as 
 "a creature of God" — a "brother and peer," — is by 
 the same author represented as God. For instance, 
 he says : " Who was that Person who thus became in- 
 carnate, was born, lived, died, and rose again, a man? 
 It was he who shared the glory of the Father before 
 the world was — the only-begotten Son of God, who 
 dwelt in his bosom — the Word by whom all things 
 were made, by whom all men were enlightened, and 
 who was himself Jehovah. Since then eternity is 
 the very first of the attributes of Deity, since the 
 divine nature is unchangeable, so that he who was 
 God in the beginning was God forever, it plainly 
 follows, that when the Son or Word of the Father 
 assumed our nature and was born a child into the 
 world, he who before had been God only, became 
 Q-od and man. While, however, this inspired nar- 
 rative plainly unfolds and establishes the doctrine, 
 that Jesus was man, it abounds with a variety of 
 evidence that he was also God." "The doctrine of 
 the godhead or deity of Christ is a necessary deduc- 
 tion from that of his eternal pre-existence: for while 
 the being of every creature of God has necessarily 
 commenced at some particular point of time, God 
 alone has existed from eternity." 1 
 
 "Since therefore, when Jesus was born, when a 
 body was prepared for him, — when he was made incar- 
 nate of a woman, and thus came into the world, — he 
 
 1 Essays, 258, 264, 230. 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 123 
 
 proceeded forth from God and descended from heaven, 
 it follows that before his birth, before his incarnation, 
 he was with God in heaven. As the doctrine that 
 Jesus Christ pre-existed in glory with the Father, is 
 thus plainly to be deduced from the declarations of 
 Scripture, so there are other passages of the sacred vol- 
 ume (perfectly accordant with these declarations) from 
 which we may derive much information respecting 
 the antecedent extent of his pre-existence." After 
 quoting many passages of Scripture, the conclusion 
 from them is thus expressed: "Such are some of the 
 principal passages in Scripture on which Christians 
 ground their belief, that their Eedeemer pre-existed 
 in some higher condition than that which appertains 
 to mortals; and which enable them to trace his pre- 
 existence backward, even to the 'days of eternity.' 
 What then was the nature in which Christ thus pre- 
 existed? I venture to reply on what I deem to be 
 the clear authority of the Sacred records, — not the 
 nature of men — not that of angels — not that of any 
 order of creatures, however eminent in the scale of 
 being, but the nature of God himself." 1 
 
 In relation to the Spirit of Christ, Joseph John 
 Gurney writes as follows: "It has always been the 
 doctrine of the Society of Friends that Christ — even 
 that very Saviour who became incarnate — was cruci- 
 fied and rose again — is " the true light which lighteth 
 every man that cometh into the world." John i. 9. 
 "For my own part, I cordially concur with the senti- 
 ment, that He who dwells and reigns by his Holy 
 Spirit in the souls of his believing children, appears by a 
 measure of the same spirit, in the hearts of all men, to 
 
 1 Essays, 225, 229. 
 
124 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 enlighten and direct their consciences, to bring them 
 to a sense of their responsibility to God, and to lead 
 them in the paths of virtue. It is my belief, that all 
 men, everywhere, have their day of visitation, and 
 that a ray from the Sun of righteousness enters ever}'' 
 dark heart of the rational children of God. And 
 where the ray is, there is the Sun. Where the influence 
 of the Spirit is, even in its smallest measure, there is 
 Christ. By it he is conveyed to the mind, by it he 
 divells there. From the emanations of his own light, 
 life, and power, he can never be separated. And fur- 
 ther — where Christ is by his Spirit, there are the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost — one God 
 blessed forever." 
 
 These views are truly in accordance with the doc- 
 trines of Friends; but the same author thus continues: 
 "But to say that this ray is itself the Sun — that this 
 divine principle or influence is itself the Christ, to 
 allege that Jesus was divine, only because this influ- 
 ence dwelt in the temple of his body, even as it dwells 
 in the righteous of all generations ; to apply to it the 
 common terms of an orthodox faith, — to call it the 
 Son of God, the Saviour, Immanuel, God with us, the 
 Son and sent of the Father — the Lamb of God, — to 
 ascribe to it the attributes and offices of the Messiah, 
 — is a practice, as I believe, utterly opposed to the 
 testimony of Scripture, and fraught with the deepest 
 danger to the souls of men." * 
 
 To the unsophisticated mind the following query 
 will probably present itself. As it is acknowledged 
 that Christ dwells by his Spirit "in the souls of his 
 believing children," — and "where Christ is by his 
 
 Letter to " The Followers of Elias Hicks " in Bait., p. 17. 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 125 
 
 Spirit, there is the Father and the Son," — whence is 
 the danger of calling him the Son — or the Lamb of 
 God? 
 
 George Fox says : " Here you may see what men 
 get by their outward knowledge; for when Adam and 
 Eve fed upon the tree of knowledge, then the Lamb 
 was slain in them from the foundation of the world. 
 And when the Lamb Christ was manifest in the flesh, 
 they that were in this outward brutish knowledge and 
 wisdom below, crucified Christ outwardly without the 
 gates of Jerusalem. And after, when Christianity 
 was spread up and down in the world, and many got 
 an outward form of Christianity and denied the power 
 and got into this brutish outward knowledge and 
 wisdom below, they crucified to themselves Christ 
 afresh, as in Hebrews vi. 6." 1 The Apostle Paul writes, 
 "It pleased God to reveal his Son in me." G-al. i. 10. 
 "Christ liveth in me." G-al. xi. 20. "God sent the 
 spirit of his son iuto your hearts." G-al. iv. 6. And 
 John declares, "He that hath the son hath life, and he 
 that hath not the son of God hath not life." 1 John 
 v. 12. 
 
 William Penn, in his " Christian Quaker," writes 
 concerning "the Light of Christ within; the great 
 principle of God in man, the root and spring of divine 
 life and knowledge in the soul ; that by which salva- 
 tion is effected for man, and which is the characteris- 
 tic of the people called Quakers, their faith and testi- 
 mony to the world." And in his "Rise and Progress 
 of the People called Quakers," he speaks of " their 
 fundamental principle, which is the corner-stone of 
 
 1 Works of G. Fox, Am. ed. 1831, Vol. VI. p. 448. 
 11* IV — Z 
 
126 THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 their fabric," — " the light of CJirist within as God's gift 
 for man's salvation." 
 
 This doctrine of the early Friends is thus contro- 
 verted by Joseph John Gurney : " The misinterpreta- 
 tion which I wish to notice, is that of certain writers 
 who appear to suppose that because Christ is called 
 the light {i. e. the enlightener), he is therefore to be 
 identified with the influence which he bestows ; in 
 short, that the light of the Spirit of God in the heart 
 of man is itself actually Christ. The obvious tendency 
 of this mistake is to deprive the Saviour of his per- 
 sonal attributes, and to reduce him to the rank of a 
 principle" Yet Gurney has himself asserted, that 
 " Where the influence of the Spirit is, even in its smallest 
 measure, there is Christ." 
 
 A favorite text of the early Friends was that passage 
 of Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, (chap. i. v. 27,) 
 where he speaks of "this mystery among the Gen- 
 tiles, which is Christ in you the hope of glory." Joseph 
 John Gurney refers to it as follows : " The words, 
 ' Christ in you,' are often recited by mistake as '•Christ 
 within,' and these expressions are sometimes used 
 amongst us as a synonym for the light of the spirit 
 of Christ in the heart, a view which some have imagined 
 to be supported by the apostle's treating the whole 
 subject as a 'mystery.' Hence it necessarily follows 
 that the light of the spirit of Christ in the heart is the 
 same as Christ himself, and is represented as the hope 
 of glory. The plain fact, however, appears to be that 
 the mystery of which the apostle is speaking, is that 
 of the incarnation of the Son of God, a subject which 
 had been typically shadowed forth to the Jews, but 
 had been totally concealed from the Gentiles, kept 
 secret since the world began, but was now made 
 
THE DIVINE BEING. 127 
 
 known to the saints, and without controversy great is 
 the mystery of godliness." 1 
 
 The application of the term principle to the seed or 
 life of God in the soul, appears to have "been particu- 
 larly objectionable to Joseph John Gurney, as shown 
 by the passages already quoted. In another passage 
 addressed to those Friends in Baltimore, whom he 
 improperly calls the followers of Elias Hicks, he 
 alludes to the early Friends, and says: "Alas that 
 any of their descendants should have forsaken the 
 Rock of their salvation, and should have reduced the 
 Saviour of men, in their estimation to the rank of a 
 mere 'principle or influence I " 2 Yet, strange as it may 
 appear, the learned author has himself made a similar 
 application of the term, as shown by the following 
 quotations : " Since it is only through the influence 
 of the Holy Spirit, that men are converted and sanc- 
 tified, and since the work of conversion and sanctifi- 
 cation is plainly attributed to the power of the Son, 
 as well as to that of the Father, it can be no matter 
 of surprise that the Holy Spirit, which is usually de- 
 scribed as the spirit of God, is also called the spirit of 
 Christ." 
 
 "There is provided for us in the economy of the 
 grace of God, an invisible, intangible, though not 
 always imperceptible, influence, an illuminating quick- 
 ening principle, by which degenerate man is born a 
 second time, morally changed — introduced to a new 
 condition of life, and gradually restored to the image 
 of his Creator." 3 
 
 "Having thus examined the evidences of Scripture 
 
 1 Brief Remarks on the Interpretation of Scripture, pp. 9, 10. 
 
 2 Letter to the Followers of E. Hicks, Bait, 1840, p. 17. 
 
 3 Essays, p. 445. 
 
128 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 respecting the nature and origin of the regenerating 
 principle, and having ascertained the channel through 
 which alone it is derived to mankind, we may now 
 direct our remarks to the Holy Spirit in his divine 
 and 'personal character." l * * * * 
 
 It will be observed that in these passages he truly 
 represents the Holy Spirit to be the same as the 
 Spirit of Christ ; this Spirit he calls an invisible in- 
 fluence, — a quickening principle, — a regenerating 
 principle, — and then he proceeds to speak of his per- 
 sonal character. 
 
 Notwithstanding the unprofitable speculations which 
 he borrowed from the schools of theology, it appears 
 that in seasons of devotion he was favored to obtain 
 a clearer and more sublime view of the Divine nature. 
 Thus he writes: "While the Christian rejoices in the 
 distinct characters and offices of the Father, the Son, 
 and the Spirit, so graciously revealed to us for our 
 instruction and edification, he probably never finds 
 his soul bowed down with so deep a reverence, or 
 filled with so pure a delight, as when he contemplates 
 the Almighty as an ineffable glory — an incom- 
 municable name — an infinite and incomprehensible 
 Unity." * 
 
 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 § 5. The doctrine of salvation by Christ, as held 
 by the early Friends, has been exhibited in the fifth 
 chapter of this treatise, and may be recapitulated as 
 follows : 
 
 1. They rejected the doctrines of imputative right- 
 
 1 Essays, p. 457. 
 
 2 A Declaration of Faith, p. 23 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 129 
 
 eousness and vicarious satisfaction, as held by Trini- 
 tarians, § 5 and 6. 
 
 2. They held the Scriptural doctrine, that Christ 
 died for all men, (2 Cor. v. 14, 15,) — not however to 
 appease the wrath of God, nor to satisfy his justice 
 by suffering as a substitute for the guilty; — but "to 
 bear witness to the truth," (John xviii. 37,) "leaving 
 us an example that we should follow his steps; " (1 Pet. 
 ii. 21;) and as an evidence of his love ; "for greater 
 love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his 
 life for his friends." (John xv. 13.) They believed, 
 moreover, that through the obedience and sufferings 
 of Christ he procured for his Church divine favors 
 and spiritual gifts. (Acts ii. 33.) "Jesus Christ, in 
 life, doctrine, and death, fulfilled his Father's will, 
 and offered up a most satisfactory sacrifice ; but not 
 to pay God, or help him as otherwise being unable 
 to save man." 1 "As it was the main design of 
 Christ's life, doctrines, and miracles, to call men to 
 repentance, faith, and obedience, so it was also the 
 great end of his sufferings to accomplish the same 
 glorious design." 2 § 6. 
 
 3. The doctrine of Reconciliation as taught in the 
 writings of the early Friends, — is a change wrought 
 in man, taking away his enmity, and " causing him to 
 grow up in that nature and life which God loveth." 
 §7 
 
 4. They taught that man "must be washed and 
 sanctified before he can be justified;" the same that 
 sanctifies him justifies him, i. e., "in the name of 
 the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor. 
 
 1 Perm's Select Works, p. 22. 2 Life of R. Claridge, 445. 
 
 X2 
 
130 SALVATION BY CHE1ST. 
 
 vi. 11.) To be justified signifies " a being made just, 
 and not merely imputed such." 1 § 8. 
 
 5. They maintained that "the blood of the Kew 
 Covenant is the life of Christ Jesus, who saith, ' ex- 
 cept ye eat my flesh and drink my blood ye have no 
 life in you." 2 "This blood is known and felt within, 
 to wash and purge the conscience, for Christ as he is 
 within, is not without his blood which is spiritual." 3 
 Redemption is by the "blood" of the Son of God, — 
 " by his life, by his power, by his nature sown in the 
 vessel, and transforming the vessel into its own like- 
 ness." 4 § 9. 
 
 6. They taught that God " hath so loved the world 
 that he hath given his only Son (a Light) that who- 
 soever believeth on him should be saved." 
 
 "As many as resist not this light, but receive the 
 same, in them is produced a holy, pure, and spiritual 
 birth, bringing forth holiness, righteousness, purity, 
 and all those blessed fruits which are acceptable to 
 God : by which hoi} 7 birth, to wit, Jesus Clirist formed 
 within us, and working his works in us, as we are 
 sanctified, so we are justified in the sight of God." 5 
 This innocent, lamb-like nature being oppressed 
 with evil and grieved with iniquity, has been referred 
 to, metaphorically, as "a lamb slain from the founda- 
 tion of the world." 6 § 10. And those who "fall 
 away," after having "tasted the good word of God," 
 are said to " crucify to themselves the Son of God 
 afresh, and put him to an open shame." (Heb. vi. 6.) 
 
 1 Barclay's Apology, Prop. VII. \ 7. 2 G. Fox, Works, V. 363-4. 
 8 Barclay's Works, p. 10. * 1. Pennington, I. 610. 
 
 6 Barclay's Apology, Prop. V. and VII. 
 6 Penn's Select Works, pp. 262-266. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 131 
 
 7. " Christ Jesus," writes Geo. Fox, "tasted death 
 for every man, and shed his blood for all men, and is 
 the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, 
 but also for the sins of the whole world." According 
 as John the Baptist testified of him when he said, 
 "Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins 
 of the world." * * * * "He it is that is now come 
 and hath given us an understanding, that we may 
 know him that is true, and he rules in our hearts by 
 his law of love and life." &C. 1 * * * * 
 
 Joseph John Gurney held the doctrines of impu- 
 tative righteousness and vicarious satisfaction, as the 
 following extracts will show, viz. : " Such was the 
 righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ ; and such is 
 the righteousness which through faith is imputed to 
 the Christian. A very slight degree of reflection on 
 the divine nature and infinite dignity of the Son of 
 God, as well as on the perfections of his human char- 
 acter, may serve to convince us that as, on the one 
 hand, he was, on account of his spotless innocence, 
 entirely suited to be a sacrifice for sin ; so on the 
 other hand his fulfilment of the whole moral law, 
 and more especially his obedience unto death, were 
 infinitely meritorious in the sight of God the Father. 
 When, therefore, we read that the righteousness of 
 Jesus Christ is imputed to the believer, we may reason- 
 ably understand such a doctrine to import that we 
 are not only saved through the sacrifice of Jesus 
 Christ, but rewarded through his merits. Our sinful- 
 ness may properly be said to be imputed to Christ, be- 
 cause when he underwent the penalty which that sin- 
 fulness demanded, he was dealt with as if he had been 
 
 1 G Fox' Letter to Gov. of Barbadoes. 
 
132 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 himself the sinner ; and it is, I apprehend, on a per- 
 fectly analogous principle that his righteousness is 
 said to be imputed to us ; because through the bound- 
 less mercy of God, we are permitted to reap the fruits 
 of it. We are regarded as if, like him, we were 
 absolutely guiltless, and are therefore delivered from 
 everlasting punishment. We are graciously accepted, 
 as if like him we had meritoriously fulfilled the whole 
 law of God,- and are therefore 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 is not only protected from the 
 pains of hell, but is in possession of a well-grounded 
 claim on the jo}'S of heaven." l 
 
 It will be observed that in this passage, the salva- 
 tion and eternal felicity of the soul are made to 
 depend, not on its moral fitness or spiritual condition, 
 but on the belief that the punishment due to sin has 
 been inflicted on a substitute, and that the righteous- 
 ness of that substitute is imputed to the believer. 
 
 This doctrine is also avowed in the following quo- 
 tations, viz.: "The Christian's hope of deliverance 
 from eternal death is founded on the glorious doc- 
 trine, that a ransom has been offered for his soul, 
 by a Saviour of infinite dignity and power; and he 
 anticipates the boon of everlasting felicity, not as 
 the reward of his own polluted ivorks, but as the just 
 and necessary consequence of a righteousness imputed 
 to the believer, the perfect righteousness of Him 
 who is not only man but God." 2 
 
 " Behold the glorious partner of the Father's 
 throne freely opening his bosom to the vials of his 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, 437. 
 
 2 Biblical Notes, 363. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 133 
 
 wrath, groaning and bleeding on the cross in the 
 nature of man, and bearing in his own body on the 
 tree the penalty of the sins of mankind." * * * * 
 "Let us call to mind, that in that hour of unutter- 
 able desertion the righteous vengeance of God against 
 a guilty world was poured forth upon the innocent 
 substitute." l 
 
 Here again, justice towards J. J. Gurney requires 
 the exhibition of sentiments from another of his 
 works, not consistent with the last two quotations, 
 but far more satisfactoiy, viz.: "There is nothing in 
 Scripture which in the least degree supports the no- 
 tion that our Heavenly Father is naturally implaca- 
 ble, and that his wrath was appeased by the Sacri- 
 fice of an innocent victim. While the prevalence 
 of bloody sacrifices among the heathen nations in all 
 ages of the world plainly indicates the feeling that 
 without an atonement there is no forgiveness of sin, 
 and while it affords an evidence of some original 
 revelation on the subject, the vulgar notion that a 
 wrathful deity is by this method rendered placable re- 
 ceives no countenance from Christianity." 2 
 
 Yet, in still another of his works, he speaks of 
 "those who know that God is their reconciled Father, 
 and that Jesus has bought them with the precious 
 price of his own blood;" 3 which seems to imply 
 that the Father required the shedding of that blood 
 in order to reconcile him to man ; whereas the true 
 
 1 Essay on Love to God, English ed. pp. 40, 45, quoted in Ap- 
 peal for Ancient Doctrines of Friends, Phila. 1847, by Orthodox 
 Yearly Meeting. The two passages here quoted are omitted in 
 an American edition. 
 
 2 Portable Evidence of Christianity, 154. 
 8 Essays on Christianity, 465. 
 
 12 
 
134 SALVATION" BY CHKIST. 
 
 Scriptural doctrine is, that "God was in Christ re- 
 conciling the world unto himself." The change by 
 which reconciliation is effected, must be wrought in 
 man; there can be no change in the Deity. 
 
 "Jesus Christ," writes J. J. Gurney, "was a vica- 
 rious sufferer, because his death on the cross was 
 graciously undergone by him, and as graciously ac- 
 cepted by the Father, in the place of that everlasting 
 death to which all men would otherwise have been 
 exposed as the certain punishment and legitimate 
 consequence of sin." 
 
 Again he writes, of the sufferings of Christ being 
 "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." 1 
 
 William Penn writes as follows, concerning "The 
 absurdities that unavoidably follow the comparison 
 of this doctrine with the sense of scripture." 
 
 "1. That God is gracious to forgive, and yet 'tis 
 impossible for him, unless the debt be fully satisfied. 
 
 "2. That the finite and impotent creature is more 
 capable of extending mercy and forgiveness than 
 the infinite and omnipotent creator. 
 
 "3. That God so loved the world he gave his only 
 Son to save it; and yet that God stood off in high 
 displeasure, and Christ gave himself to God as a 
 complete satisfaction to his offended justice: with 
 many more such like gross consequences that might 
 be drawn." 3 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, pp. 42o, 427. 
 
 3 Sandy Foundation Shaken, Select Works, p. 1G. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 135 
 
 Concerning Justification and Sanctification, J. J. 
 Gurney writes as follows: "From these premises it 
 follows, that, in the order of the grace of God, justifi- 
 cation precedes sanctification , and that faith in Jesus 
 Christ, by which the ungodly are justified, has re- 
 spect in a very pre-eminent manner to the atonement 
 which has been made for the sins of the world." 
 * * * * "While however the justification of the sin- 
 ner through faith in a crucified Redeemer precedes 
 the work of sanctification. its close and inseparable 
 connection with that work is evinced by the fact, 
 that in the economy of God's spiritual government, 
 this veiy faith is the constituted means through 
 which we obtain the gift of the Holy Spirit." 1 
 
 Again he says: "Man by nature is a child of 
 wrath, laboring under the curse of the law — the 
 awful sentence of eternal death. What then can be 
 conceived more adapted to this need than justifica- 
 tion — a plenary remission of all his sins through the 
 atoning sacrifice of Christ, and a free acceptance of 
 him as righteous, for the sake of a righteous Saviour? 
 Here he finds reconciliation with a God of Justice, 
 deliverance from condemnation and eternal punish- 
 ment, and a well-founded hope of immortal bliss. 
 The utmost claims of the law are satisfied; the holi- 
 ness of the Creator is more than ever manifested; 
 and the broken-hearted sinner reposes in peace, on 
 the bosom of infinite mercy. 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 purged from every dead work, and 
 having obtained an interest in the Saviour of men, 
 
 1 Essays on Christianity, p. 505. 
 
136 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 he wears a robe of righteousness in which there is 
 no spot." 1 
 
 From this it appears, that he, who is in himself vile 
 and polluted, may nevertheless wear a robe of right- 
 eousness; but Geo. Fox writes: "So far as a man is 
 sanctified, so far as he is justified and no farther." 2 
 
 And Barclay soys: "The manner and way whereby 
 his [Christ's] righteousness and obedience, death and 
 sufferings without, become profitable unto us, and 
 made ours, is by receiving him and becoming one 
 with him in our hearts, embracing and entertaining 
 that holy seed, which as it is embraced and entertained, 
 becometh a holy birth in us, which in Scripture is 
 called, Christ formed within; Christ within the hope 
 of glory. Gal. iv. 19; Coloss. i. 27." 3 
 
 Joseph John Gurney, commenting on the dis- 
 course of our Saviour, concerning eating his flesh and 
 drinking his blood, (John vi. 31—32 and 47-48,) says: 
 "Hence it follows that the bread which Christ gives 
 to eat is his flesh which he offered upon the cross for 
 the sins of the whole world. As eating the bread of 
 life is identical with believing in Christ, the incarnate 
 Son of God, so eating his flesh is identical with such 
 a belief in him as is especially directed to his aton- 
 ing sacrifice. Our Lord's meaning becomes yet more 
 indisputable when he pursues his use of this expres- 
 sive figure, and adds to the eating of his flesh the 
 drinking of his blood: 'Verily I say unto you, except 
 ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his 
 blood, ye have no life in you. He that eateth my 
 
 1 Portable Evidence, Phila., 1856, pp. 163, 1G4. 
 
 2 Works of George Fox, III. 450. 
 
 8 Truth cleared of Calumnies, Barclay's Works, p. 19. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 137 
 
 flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in 
 him,' ver. 53 to 56. That the flesh and blood of 
 Christ are here spoken of in relation to his incarna- 
 tion and atoning Sacrifice, is made abundantly clear 
 by the comparison of all the other passages in the 
 Kew Testament, and especially in the writings of 
 this apostle, in which mention is made of that flesh 
 or of that blood. These passages are numerous, and 
 on a careful examination of them, it will be found 
 that the flesh always means his human body — that 
 body which was born, died, and rose again — and that 
 his blood always means his very blood, — which was 
 his natural life, and which was naturally shed on the 
 cross for the remission of sins." 1 " Those only can 
 be truly said to 'eat the flesh of the Son of man 
 and drink his blood,' whose whole reliance for salva- 
 tion is placed upon him, as the sacrifice for sin ; and 
 these are they who receive 'the Spirit that quicken- 
 eth' — who dwell in Christ and know Christ to dwell 
 in them — who through the Spirit are made alive 
 unto God in this world, and therefore live forever in 
 the world to come." John vi. 53-03. 2 
 
 If spiritual life depends upon eating the flesh and 
 drinking the blood of Christ, — and those only can 
 partake of it whose whole reliance is placed upon him as 
 the sacrifice for sin, — what becomes of those w r ho have 
 never heard of that sacrifice ? Yet Joseph John 
 Gurney admits that even these, when they believe in 
 and obey the Light, are "partakers in their measure 
 
 1 Brief Remarks on Interpretation of Scripture, pp. 13, 14. 
 
 2 Essays on Christianity, 50G. 
 
 12* 2A 
 
138 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 and according to their capacity in the body and blood 
 of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." l 
 
 How much more simple and consistent is the doc- 
 trine of the early Fiiends on this point as expressed 
 by Barclay: "The communion of the body and blood 
 of Christ is inward and spiritual, which is the par- 
 ticipation of his flesh and blood by which the inward 
 man is daily nourished in the hearts of those in whom 
 Christ dwells." 
 
 "The body then of Christ which believers partake 
 of is spiritual and not carnal, and his blood which they 
 drink of is pure and heavenly and not human or ele- 
 mentary, as Augustine also affirms of the body of 
 Christ; Tractnt. Psalm xcviii." ■ 
 
 The early Friends believed that Jesus Christ the 
 head of the church, and the saints his members, in 
 their heavenly state, are not in carnal but in spiritual 
 bodies. Joseph John Ghirney writes as follows: "He 
 [man] has within him a never-dying spirit; and even 
 that part of him which is destined to moulder in the 
 grave, shall in the end be found the seed of a spiritual 
 body, and shall be clothed with incorruption and im- 
 mortality." " The man who sleeps in the dust of 
 the earth shall be quickened — shall be raised from a 
 state of death — shall stand alive before the judg- 
 ment-seat of the Almighty." 3 "Now it is in reveal d 
 religion, and there only, that blind and erring man 
 receives an illumination exactly proportioned to the 
 depths and completeness of his ignorance." * * * * 
 "There he is taught the lesson of the immortality of 
 the soul, of the resurrection of the body and of judg- 
 
 1 J. J. G's. Declaration, quoted in g 1 of this chapter. 
 
 2 Apology XIII. I 2. 3 Essays on Christianity, pp. 193, 187. 
 
THE DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS. 139 
 
 ment to come." "As it relates to the faithful fol- 
 lowers of Christ, the resurrection of the body clearly 
 forms a part of the scheme of redemption." 1 
 
 "\Vm. Perm, in reply to the Bishop of Cork, says : 
 " We have indeed been negative to the gross conceit 
 of people concerning the rising of this carnal body 
 we carry about us, which better agrees with the Al- 
 coran of Mahomet, than the gospel of Christ. But 
 that there is a resurrection of the just and unjust, to 
 rewards and punishments, we have ever believed. 
 And indeed, we cannot but wonder that any should 
 be displeased with us, for being pleased with that 
 which God is pleased to give us. Bodies we shall 
 have, but not the same, says the Apostle, and so be- 
 lieves the Quaker." 2 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS 
 
 In America, the Society of Friends, during the 
 first quarter of this century, generally held the views 
 inculcated by Fox, Penn, Pennington, and Barclay, 
 and were accustomed, in their ministry, to lay great 
 stress on the Grace of God, or Spirit of Christ re- 
 vealed in the soul, as the efficient cause of salvation. 
 It is believed that the ministry and writings of Job 
 Scott had much influence in promoting this spiritual 
 view of Christianity; and Elias Hicks, who began his 
 ministry about the year 1775, had long been a distin- 
 
 1 Portable Evidence, pp. 160, 179. 2 Perm's Select Works, 827. 
 
140 THE DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS. 
 
 guished advocate of the same doctrine. He Lad 
 travelled much as a minister of the gospel, and for 
 more than forty years his services had been highly 
 esteemed throughout the Society, there -being then 
 little or no opposition to his religions views. "In 
 declaring what he believed to be the counsel of God, 
 he was bold and fearless, and his ministry, though 
 unadorned with the embellishments of human learn- 
 ing, was clear and powerful. In argument he was 
 strong and convincing, and his appeals to the experi- 
 ence and convictions of his hearers were striking and 
 appropriate." ' In private life he was a bright exam- 
 ple of the Christian virtues ; a peace-maker, a friend 
 to the poor, and especially concerned to bear an un- 
 compromising testimony against the enslavement and 
 oppression of the African race. 
 
 The doctrinal views of Elias Hicks have been di- 
 versely understood or construed by different indi- 
 viduals according to the point of view from which 
 they were contemplated. By his adversaries he was 
 charged with holding and promulgating doctrines at 
 variance with the fundamental principles of Chris- 
 tianity ; while on the other hand his friends main- 
 tained, that his views were generally in accordance 
 with the Scriptures of Truth, and with the writings 
 of the early Friends. 
 
 A fair and candid investigation of this subject 
 requires a thorough examination of his writings and 
 acknowledged discourses; and in making selec- 
 tions to illustrate his views, a due regard will be had 
 to the context, and to the general scope of his 
 remarks. 
 
 1 Testimony of Jericho Monthly Meeting of Friends. 
 
THE DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS. 141 
 
 IMMEDIATE REVELATION. 
 
 § 1. It has been shown in Chapter L, sections 9 and 
 10, that according to the writings of the early Frieuds 
 there is " an evangelical principle of light and life, 
 wherewith Christ hath enlightened every man that 
 cometh into the world." 1 
 
 On this point, Elias Hicks writes as follows : " God 
 is a Spirit, invisible and incomprehensible to every 
 thing but spirit, agreeably to the doctrine and con- 
 clusive argument of the Apostle Paul, ' What man 
 knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of man 
 which is in him? even so, the things of God knoweth 
 no man, but the Spirit of God;' and again, '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,' and 
 only spiritually, 'discerned.' It therefore necessarily 
 follows that man, with all the wisdom he can acquire, 
 aided by human science, however elaborately studied, 
 and with the further assistance of all the books and 
 writings in the world, if void of immediate divine 
 revelation, never has known, nor ever can know God, 
 in relation either to his essence, or those excellent 
 attributes which are in correspondence and unison 
 with his pure, holy, and unchangeable nature; for 
 that which may be known of God is manifest within 
 man, 2 and that not by his reasoning powers, but by 
 the immediate impression and unpremeditated sen- 
 sations which the immortal spirit of man feels and 
 sees, by being brought into contact with and under 
 the certain and self-evident influence of the Spirit of 
 
 1 Barclay's Apology, Prop. VI. 2 Kom. i 19. 
 
 2A2 
 
142 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 God upon it. And hence a man is enabled to attribute 
 to God bis due only from sensible and self-evident 
 experience." l 
 
 "Hence the necessity of every individual rallying 
 to tbe standard, the light within, for in that only can 
 we as a people unite our strength ; that being our 
 only standard principle from the beginning; and if 
 we desert that or add anvthin^ to it, as essential 
 besides good works, we shall become a broken and 
 divided people, and must remain so until all recur to 
 this first principle as our only rule of faith and prac- 
 tice ; and prove by our fruits that we are led and 
 guided by it, that is, by our just and righteous works, 
 doing unto all others as we would that others should 
 do unto us." 2 
 
 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 § 2. The views of the early Friends in relation to 
 the Scriptures have been exhibited in Chapter II. of 
 this treatise. They believed in the authenticity and 
 divine authority of the sacred writings, and expressed 
 a willingness that "all their doctrines and practices 
 should be tried by them." Nevertheless, "because 
 they are only a declaration of the fountain and not 
 the fountain itself, therefore they are not to be 
 esteemed the principal ground of all truth and knowl- 
 edge, nor yet the adequate primary rule of faith and 
 manners." They are "a secondary rule, subordinate 
 to the spirit from which they have all their excellency 
 and certainty." 3 
 
 Elias Ilicks writes as follows: "As to the Scrip- 
 tures of Truth, as recorded in the book called the 
 
 1 Letters of E. Ilicks, New York, 1834, p. 25. a Ibid. p. 180. 
 8 Barclay's Apology, Prop. III. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 143 
 
 Bible, I have ever believed that all parts of them 
 that could not be known but by revelation, were 
 written by holy men as they were inspired by the 
 Holy Ghost, and could not be known through any 
 other medium, and they are profitable for our encour- 
 agement, comfort and instruction, in the very way 
 that the apostle testifies ; and I have always accounted 
 them, when rightly understood, as the best of books 
 extant. I have always delighted in reading them, in 
 my serious moments, in preference to any other book, 
 from my youth up, and have made more use of their 
 contents to confirm and establish my ministerial labors 
 in the gospel than most other ministers that I am 
 acquainted with. But at the same time, I prize that 
 from whence- they have derived their origin, much higher 
 than I do them ; as * that for which a thing is such, 
 the thing itself is more such.' And no man, I con- 
 ceive, can know and rightly profit by them, but by 
 the opening of the same inspiring spirit by which they 
 were written; and I apprehend I have read them as 
 much as most other men, and few, I believe, have 
 derived more profit from them than I have." * 
 
 In another letter he says: "As respects the Scrip- 
 tures of Truth, I have highly esteemed them from my 
 youth up, have always given them the preference to 
 any other book, and have read them abundantly more 
 than any other book, and I would recommend all to 
 the serious and diligent perusal of them. And I 
 apprehend I have received as much comfort and in- 
 struction from them as any other man. Indeed they 
 have instructed me home to the sure unchangeable 
 foundation — the light within, or spirit of truth, the 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, p. 215. 
 
144 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 only gospel foundation that leads and guides into all 
 truth, and thereby completes man's salvation, which 
 nothing else ever has, or ever can do. But why need 
 I say these things, as all men know that have heard 
 me, that I confirm my doctrine abundantly from their 
 testimony: and I have always endeavored sincerely 
 to place them in their true place and station, but 
 never dare exalt them above what they themselves 
 declare ; and as no spring can rise higher than its 
 fountain, so likewise the Scriptures can only direct to 
 the fountain from ivhence they originated — the spirit of 
 truth : as saith the apostle, 'The things of God know 
 eth no man, but the Spirit of God ; ' therefore when 
 the Scriptures have directed and pointed us to this 
 light within, or Spirit of Truth, there they must stop 
 — it is their ultimatum — the top stone of what they 
 can do. And no other external testimony of men or 
 books can do any more. And Jesus, in his last 
 charge to his disciples, in order to prevent them from 
 looking without for instruction in the things of God, 
 after he had led them up to the highest pinnacle that 
 any outward evidence could effect, certified them that 
 this light within, or spirit of truth, by which only 
 their salvation could be effected, dwelt with them and 
 should be in them. And this every Christian knows 
 to be a truth ; and there never was a real Christian 
 made b} 7 any other power than this spirit of truth ; 
 and everything that can be done by man without it, 
 must fail of effecting his salvation." ■ 
 
 These passages, written in the year 1829, may be 
 considered as expressing the settled opinions of Elias 
 Hicks in the last year of his life. It is much to be 
 
 1 Answer to Six Queries, Letters of E. Hicks, p. 227. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 145 
 
 regretted that in some letters of an earlier date, writ- 
 ten apparently without due consideration, and in the 
 confidence of friendship, (which proved to be mis- 
 placed,) he expressed sentiments apparently at vari- 
 ance with those above quoted. 
 
 In a letter to Phebe Willis, dated 5th mo. 19th, 
 1818, and first published by his opponents without his 
 consent, the following passages are found : " Among 
 other subjects I have been led, I trust carefully and 
 candidly, to investigate the effect produced by the 
 book called the Scriptures since it has borne that 
 appellation ; and it appears from a comparative view, 
 to have been the cause of fourfold more harm than 
 good to Christendom, since the apostles' days, and 
 which I think must be indubitably plain to every 
 faithful honest mind that has investigated her historv 
 free from the undue bias of education and tradition. 
 Mark the beginning of the apostasy. When the pro- 
 fessors of Christianity began to quarrel with and sepa- 
 rate from each other, it all sprung from their different 
 views and different interpretations of passages of Scrip- 
 ture ; and to such a pikh did their quarrels arise, as 
 that a recourse to the sword was soon deemed neces- 
 sary to settle those disputes. And the strongest party 
 in that line finding, that as long as the people were at 
 liberty, and had the privilege of searching the Scriptures 
 and putting their own interpretations upon them, and 
 making them their rule, diversity of opinion and dif- 
 ferences would increase, this led the strongest party 
 to that disagreeable and unchristian alternative of 
 wresting them out of their hands, and forbidding 
 their being read by the people at large. And this 
 state of things continued for many years, until the 
 beginning of the Reformation by Martin Luther. It 
 
 IV — 13 
 
146 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 will be now necessary to consider whether the Scrip- 
 tures were in any wise accessory to this infant begin- 
 ning of reformation ? I think it is clear they were 
 not ; but as Luther and his adherents gained strength, 
 they began to shake off the yoke of papal oppression, 
 and among other things, the restriction on the Scrip- 
 tures was taken om, and every citizen that joined Lu- 
 ther's party had the privilege of reading the Scrip- 
 tures at his pleasure. And what was the result? A 
 diversity of sentiment respecting what they taught, 
 which soon set the reformers one against another and 
 produced such divisions and animosities among them 
 that recourse was again had to the sword to settle dis- 
 putes. In this condition things continued until Geo. 
 Fox was raised up to bear testimony to the light and 
 spirit of truth in the hearts and consciences of men 
 and women as the only sure rule of faith and practice, 
 both in relation to religious and moral things, and 
 which was complete and sufficient without the aid of 
 books or men, as his doctrine and example clearly 
 evinces, as his reformation was begun and carried on 
 without the necessary aid of either." * * * * "What 
 I have written has been done in scraps of time that I 
 have, as it were, stolen from my other many avoca- 
 tions, without any time to copy it, or give it much 
 examination ; therefore I hope thou wilt excuse the 
 improprieties that may have escaped my notice, be- 
 lieving that thou wilt be able to apprehend the main 
 drift of the arguments, and be willing to put the best 
 construction on such parts as may, to thee, appear 
 erroneous." 1 
 
 In considering this ill-digested letter, the query 
 naturally arises: If the Scriptures ''have been the 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, pp. 43-50. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTUKES. 147 
 
 ?ause of fourfold more harm than good to Christen- 
 dom," why was the "forbidding their being read by 
 the people at large," an "unchristian" act. The re- 
 mark in relation to the Protestant Reformation, that 
 the Scriptures were not "in any wise accessory" to 
 its beginning, is also founded in mistake; for it ap- 
 pears that the New Testament was, through divine 
 grace, made instrumental to enlighten the mind of 
 Luther and discover to him the errors of Romanism. 
 As to George Fox, we know that the Bible was his 
 constant companion ; his writings are replete with 
 Scripture texts, and probably no other teacher ever 
 referred more constantly to the sacred volume. It 
 was "his frequent advice to Friends, to keep to 
 Scripture language, terms, words, and doctrines, as 
 taught by the Holy Ghost, in matters of faith, re- 
 ligion, controversy, and conversation, and not to be 
 imposed upon and drawn into unscriptural terms, in- 
 vented bv men in their human wisdom." 1 
 
 Justice towards Elias Hicks requires that we should 
 o-ive due weight to the extenuating; circumstances 
 that attended the writing and publication of his let- 
 ters to Phebe AVillis, whom he regarded as a cordial 
 friend. If he erred in writing them, how much more 
 blameworthy were they, who gave them publicity 
 without his consent ! 
 
 He stated his views more explicitly in a letter to 
 Moses Brown, dated 3d mo. 30th, 1825, as the follow- 
 ing passage will show, viz. : "As to what thou sayest 
 of my contradicting myself, by saying at one time, 
 that the Scriptures were the best book, and at another 
 time, that it does more hurt than good ; if this is, 
 to thee, a paradox, it is one, I conceive, thy own com- 
 
 1 Works of G. F., IV. 3. 
 
148 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 mon sense and every day's observation would easily 
 solve. For it is my candid belief, that those that 
 hold and believe the Scriptures to be the only rule 
 of faith and practice, to these it does much more hurt 
 than good. And has anything tended more to di- 
 vide Christendom into sects and parties than the 
 Scriptures ? and by which so many cruel and bloody 
 wars have been promulgated. And yet at the same 
 time, may it not be one of the best books, if rightly 
 used under the guidance of the Holy Spirit ? But, if 
 abused, like every other blessing, it becomes a curse. 
 Therefore to these it always does more hurt than 
 good ; and thou knowest that these comprehend far 
 the greatest part of Christendom." ■ 
 
 There is, however, sufficient evidence to show that 
 a vast amount of o*ood has been derived from the 
 proper use of the Scriptures: if evil has resulted 
 from their abuse, it is no more than may be said of 
 c>thcr precious gifts received from a bountiful Creator. 
 
 A number of passages extracted from the printed 
 sermons of Elias Hicks, have been published and 
 circulated by his adversaries, most of which, being 
 separated from the context, give an erroneous view 
 of his religious opinions. Borne of these extracts 
 relating to the Scriptures are here subjoined, together 
 with a portion of the context. The sentences ex- 
 tracted by his opponents are included in brackets, 2 
 viz. : — 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, pp. 174-5. 
 
 ■These extracts may be found in "A Declaration," &c., pub- 
 lished by order of the Yearly Meeting of "Orthodox Friends/ 1 
 hela in Phila., in tin- year 1828. For a refutation of the chai 
 
 contained in that Declaration, see a Review by Wm. Gibbous, 
 published by T. E. Chapman, Philadelphia, 1847. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 149 
 
 "We find, that although these things are so plainly 
 written in the book which we call the Bible, yet we 
 feel and know certainly that there is no power in it 
 to enable us to put in practice what is therein written. 
 [One would suppose that, to a rational mind, the 
 hearing and reading of the instructive parables of 
 Jesus would have a tendency to reform, and turn men 
 about to truth, and lead them on in it. But they have 
 no such effect."]" In the following paragraph he says: 
 " We may read of this ; but has the letter ever turned 
 any one to the right thing, unless the light opening it 
 to the understanding has helped him to put in practice 
 what the letter dictates ? " 
 
 The meaning intended to be conveyed by the 
 speaker is evidently the same as thus expressed by 
 Isaac Pennington : "Life cannot be received from the 
 Scriptures, but only from Christ the fountain thereof; 
 no more cau the Scriptures give the rule, but point 
 to the fountain of the same life, where alone the rule 
 of life, as the life itself, can be received. The Scrip- 
 tures cannot ingraft into Christ nor give a living rule 
 to him that is ingrafted; but he that hath heard the 
 testimony of the Scriptures concerning Christ, and 
 hath come to him, must abide in him and wait on 
 him for the writing of the law of the Spirit of life 
 in his heart, and this will be his rule from the law 
 of sin and death, even unto the land of life." 1 
 
 Another garbled quotation from the Sermons of 
 Elias Hicks, when united with a portion of the con- 
 text, reads as follows : — 
 
 "O that the spirit that dwelt in David might dwell 
 
 1 Works of I. Pennington, London, 1761, Vol. I. p. 268. 
 13* IV— 2 B 
 
150 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 in us ; that, from a sense of our impotence and weak- 
 ness, our prayers might ascend like his ; 'Lord show 
 me my secret faults.' And what are these faults 
 that are so various and so many? Why, some are 
 led away to the worship of images by being deceived 
 and turned aside by tradition and books; they wor- 
 ship other gods beside the true God. [They have 
 been so bound up in the letter, that they think they 
 must attend to it to the exclusion of everything else. 
 Here is an abominable idol worship of a thing with- 
 out any life at all, — a dead monument !] Oh ! that 
 our minds might be enlightened, — that our hearts 
 might be opened, — that we might know the differ- 
 ence between thing and thing. Most of the worship 
 in Christendom is idolatry, dark and blind idolatry; 
 for all outward worship is so, — it is a mere worship 
 of images. For if we make an image merely in im- 
 agination, it is an idol." — Phila. Sermons, pp. 129, 130. 
 
 In this passage the censure intended to be con- 
 veyed was not against the use, but the abuse of the 
 Scriptures. The same idea is expressed in the follow- 
 ing quotation from Pennington. "The}' run to the 
 Scriptures with that understanding which is out of 
 the truth, and which never shall be let into the truth; 
 and so being not able to reach and comprehend the 
 truth as it is, they study, they invent, they imagine 
 a meaning; they form a likeness, a similitude of the 
 truth as near as they can, and this must go for the 
 truth ; and this they honor and bow before as the 
 will of God; which being not the will of God, but a 
 likeness of their own inventing and forming, they 
 worship not God, they honor not the Scriptures, but 
 they honor and worship the work of their own brain. 
 
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 151 
 
 And every scripture which man hath thus formed a 
 meaning out of, and hath not read in the true and 
 living light of God's eternal Spirit, he hath made an 
 image by, ne hath made an idol of; and the respect 
 and honor he gives this meaning is not a respect 
 and honor given to God, but to his own image, to 
 his own idol." 1 
 
 The following passage from a sermon of Elias 
 Hicks has been selected by his opponents to show 
 that he and his friends assert "that the direction of 
 our Lord to search the Scriptures is not correct," 
 viz.: "JN'ow the book we read in says, 'Search the 
 Scriptures.' But this is incorrect; we must all see it 
 is incorrect; because we have all reason to believe 
 they read the Scriptures, and hence they accused 
 Jesus of being an impostor." 2 The remainder of the 
 paragraph was withheld ; it reads as follows : " They 
 were more intent upon reading the Scriptures than 
 any other people under heaven. They read them, 
 thinking that through them they should become wise 
 by the letter." 
 
 The learned Adam Clark affirms, that the text 
 here referred to should be translated, "Ye search 
 the Scriptures diligently;" and adds: "Perhaps the 
 Scriptures were never more diligently searched than 
 at that very time." 
 
 Barclay says: "That place may be taken in the in- 
 dicative mood, 'Ye search the Scriptures;' which in- 
 terpretation the Greek word will bear; and so Pasor 
 translateth it : which, by the reproof following, seem- 
 eth also to be the more genuine interpretation; as 
 Cvrillus Ions; ago hath observed." 3 
 
 1 I. Pennington's Works, I. 13. 2 Phila. Sermon, p. 314. 
 
 8 Apology, Prop. III. § 7. 
 
152 DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS. 
 
 THE ORIGINAL AND PRESENT STATE OF MAX. 
 
 § 3. By reference to the third chapter of this 
 treatise, it will be seen that the commonly received 
 doctrine of original sin was not held by the early 
 Friends. 
 
 In accordance with their views, Elias Hicks writes 
 as follows: "As to the doctrine of original sin, ac- 
 cording to the acceptation of some professors of 
 Christianity, that we are under the curse for the 
 transgression of our first parents, I abhor the idea, 
 as it casts a great indignity on the divine character 
 to think that a gracious and merciful God should con« 
 demn us for an act that was wholly out of our powei 
 to avoid! I consider it very little short if any, of 
 blasphemy againsl God. For 1 have never felt my- 
 Belf under condemnation for any sin but my own 
 neither have 1 felt any justification for any righteous- 
 
 ness but what has been wrought in nie by the grace 
 
 of God : believing with the apostle, that "bygn 
 we are saved through faith, and that not of our- 
 selves, it is the gift of God, not of works lesl any 
 man should boast;" that is, doI any works of our 
 own, "for we are his workmanship, created in Christ 
 
 Jesus unt( >d works, which God hath before or- 
 
 dained that we should walk in them." ' 
 
 In a sermon, at Pine Street Meeting. Philadelphia, 
 Elias Hicks is reported to have Bpokeo as follows, 
 viz.: u He [the Most High] gives as tin' grace of re- 
 pentance, and enables us so t<> walk as to be recon- 
 ciled to him, and gain a greater establishment in 
 himself, and in the truth, than when we first came 
 
 1 Letters of B. Hicks, p. *213. 
 
DOCTRINES OF ELIAS HICKS. 153 
 
 out of his creatine: hands. For although man was 
 made pure and without defilement, — for lie declares 
 that all that he made 'was very good,' — yet man 
 had no virtue, for he had no knowledge : we hring 
 no true knowledge into the world with us. But God, 
 in his infinite wisdom and goodness, saw that the 
 onlv wav in which man could rise and he a commu- 
 meant with Him, was to place him in a state of pro- 
 bation, and furnish him with means whereby he 
 might go on in the warfare that this state of proba- 
 tion opened in his soul. For having endued his 
 creature man with propensities both of body and 
 mind, these propensities tempted him to turn aside 
 from the will of his Creator. Here was immediately 
 a warfare begun — God was on one side, and every- 
 thing o-ood was united with him and in him. The 
 creature — the rational creature, as it was united to 
 the animal body, was of the earth and therefore 
 earthy. Aja the apostle say-: 'The first man is of 
 the earth, earthy: the second man,' that is the birth 
 of God in the soul, is spiritual, livery one that is 
 born of God has this inward birth; as we read, "that 
 was not first which is spiritual, but that which is 
 natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.' And 
 here now, this has been the experience of every 
 rational soul under heaven : and it is the only me- 
 dium whereby we can ever be united again to God. 
 And if man had not fallen, as we come into the 
 world without knowledge and capacity to do any- 
 thing, though innocent: so we must know another 
 birth — a birth of the immortal spirit, which is as 
 invisible as God himself. We must come to witness 
 a birth of the Spirit, a second birth, as Jesus de- 
 
 i^ B2 
 
154 ON THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 clared to Kicodemus, 'Except a man be born again he 
 cannot see the kingdom of God.'" 1 
 
 ON THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 § 4. It has been shown in the fourth chapter of 
 this treatise, that the early Friends rejected the com- 
 monly received doctrine of the Trinity, or distinct 
 and separate personality of Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit ; and that they acknowledged the Divinity of 
 Christ as taught in the Scriptures. 2 
 
 In order to institute a comparison between their 
 doctrines and those of Elias Hicks, the following se- 
 lection has been made from his writings and reported 
 discourses. 
 
 u The doctrine of the Trinity, as held by many 
 professing Christians, I also consider a weak and 
 vulgar error: that of three distinct persons in one 
 God, and that each of these persons is whole God, 
 as, I think, is inserted in some of the confessions of 
 faith. As I believe there cannot be a greater absurd- 
 ity than to apply personality to God, in any right 
 sense of the word, as personality implies locality, 
 which signifies limited to place, which would be very 
 impious to say of the infinite Jehovah ; it is also a 
 doctrine unwarranted by Scripture, as the word Tri- 
 nity is not to be found in the Bible; for although the 
 apostle is made to say, agreeably to our present trans- 
 lation, that there are three that bear record in Heaven, 
 yet he assures us that these three are but one." 3 
 
 The following extract from a Sermon delivered by 
 
 1 The Quaker, I. 56. 
 
 a See, also, recapitulation in Chapter VII. Section 4. 
 
 3 Letters of E. Hicks, p. 55. 
 
ON THE DIVINE BEING. 155 
 
 Elias Hicks in Pine Street Meeting, Philadelphia, 
 12th month 10th, 1826, is one of the passages on 
 which a charge against him of promulgating "anti- 
 christian doctrines" was made by the ruling party in 
 that meeting, and sent by a committee to his own 
 monthly meeting, viz. : — 
 
 " I say, dearly beloved, my soul craves it for us, 
 that we may sink down and examine ourselves ; ac- 
 cording to the declaration of the Apostle : ' Examine 
 yourselves whether ye be in the faith ; prove your 
 own selves: know ye not your own selves, how that 
 Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates ? ' 
 Now we cannot suppose that the Apostle meant 
 that outward man, that walked about the streets 
 of Jerusalem ; because he is not in any of us. But 
 what is this Jesus Christ? He came to be a Sa- 
 viour to that nation, and was limited to that na- 
 tion. He came to gather up and look up the lost 
 sheep of the house of Israel. But as he was a Sa- 
 viour in the outward sense, so he was an outward 
 shadow of good things to come ; and so the work of 
 the man Jesus Christ was a figure. He healed the 
 sick of their outward calamities, — he cleansed the 
 leprosy, — all of which was external and affected only 
 their bodies, — as sickness don't affect the souls of 
 the children of men, though they may labor under 
 all these things. But as he was considered a saviour, 
 he meant by what he said, a saviour is within you, 
 the anointing of the Spirit of God is within you : for 
 this made the ways of Jesus so wonderful in his day, 
 that the Psalmist in his prophecy concerning him 
 exclaims : * Thou hast loved righteousness and hated 
 iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed 
 thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.' 
 
156 ON THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 He had loved righteousness, you perceive, and there- 
 fore was prepared to receive the fulness of the Spirit, 
 the fulness of the divine anointing; for there was no 
 germ of evil in him or about him : both his soul and 
 body were pure. He was anointed above all his 
 fellows, to be the head of the church, the top gh . the 
 chief corner-stone, elect and precious. And what v 
 it that was a saviour? Xot that which was outward : 
 it was not flesh and blood : for 'flesh and blood cannot 
 inherit the kingdom of heaven : ' it must go to the 
 earth from whence it was taken. It was that life, 
 that saint' life that I have already mentioned, that * 
 in him and which is the light and life of men, and 
 which lighteth every man, and consequently every 
 woman that cometh into the world. And we have 
 this light and life in us; which is what the apostle 
 meant by Jesus Christ ; and if we have not this ruling 
 in us, we are dead, because we arc not under the law 
 of the spirit of life. For the 'law is light, and the 
 reproofs of instruction the way of life.' 
 
 After Elias Hicks t »ok his seat, Jonathan Evans, 
 
 an elder of Pine Street Meeting, ar08e and declared 
 
 that the Society of Friends believed in k *the atone- 
 ment, mediation, and intercession of out' Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ" "We believe him," said he, 
 " to be King of kings and Lord of lords, before wh< 
 judgment-seat every sonl shall be arraigned and 
 judged by him. We do not conceive him to be a 
 mere man; and we therefore desire that people may 
 not suppose that we hold any such doctrines, or that 
 we have any unity with them." Isaac Lloyd, another 
 elder of the same meeting, said : " I unite with .Jona- 
 than Evans, — we never have believed that our blessi d 
 Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, came to the Jews 
 
ON THE DIVINE BEING. 157 
 
 only, for he was given for God's salvation to the ends 
 
 of the earth." 1 
 
 Elias Hicks added, " I have spoken ; and I leave it 
 for the people to judge,— I don't assume the judg- 
 ment-seat." 
 
 On this point Wrn. Penn writes as follows: "The 
 coming of Christ in that blessed manifestation [in 
 the flesh] was to the Jews only: he says it himself, ' He 
 was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' 
 Mitt. xv. 24. Again : 'He came unto his own, and 
 his own received him not.' John i. 11." 
 
 Isaac Pennington, on behalf of the Friends, writes: 
 " Now they distinguish, according to the Scriptures, 
 between that which is called the Christ and the bodily 
 .rment which he took. The one was flesh, the other 
 spirit. 'The flesh profiteth nothing/ saith he; 'the 
 Spirit quickeneth, and he that eateth me shall live by 
 me, even as I live by the Father.' John vi. 57, 63. 
 Thia is the manna, itself the true treasure; the other 
 but the visible or earthen vessel which held it. The 
 body of flesh was but the veil. Eeb. x. 20. The eter- 
 nal life was the substance veiled. The one he did 
 partake of ae the rest of the children did; the other 
 was he which did partake thereof. Eeb. ii. 14." 
 
 George Whitehead writes: "Christ, as God, his 
 soul was increated. As man, hit toul or spirit was not 
 the Deity, but formed and assumed by the Word. The 
 Word or Son of God who made the world, was not a 
 creature, because he made all creatures." 3 
 
 The following passages, from the letters of Eliafl 
 
 i The Quaker, I. 68, 72. 2 Ibid. W. Penn, Vol. V. p. 385. 
 
 * Antidote against the Venom of Snake in the Grass. London, 
 
 1697, p. 191. 
 14 
 
158 OX THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 Hicks to some of his intimate friends, disclose his sen- 
 timents in relation to the Divinity of Christ, his mi- 
 raculous conception, miracles, resurrection and ascen- 
 sion, viz. : "Jesus Christ in his outward manifestation 
 was more blest and abundantly more glorified than 
 any other man, and was above all, and therefore tvas the 
 representative of God on earth, visible to the external 
 senses, although the power by which he did his 
 mighty works was the invisible power of God, con- 
 ferred upon him for that end, he being the instrument 
 through whom God, by his power, wrought all those 
 mighty works, that declared him to he the Son of God 
 with power; but it was only the effects of the power, 
 and not the power that was visible to the outward 
 senses of his disciples and the people. Hence it was 
 expedient that he Bhould leave them as to hia visible 
 appearance, as nothing short of that conld open the 
 way for their reception of the Holy Spirit as a leader. 
 And in another respect he stood in the place of God 
 to that people, in raising their dead outwardly, and 
 healing all their ontward maladies, and forgiving tip 
 he healed of all their legal sins, by which he qualified 
 them to enjoy all the privileges and good things of 
 their outward Heaven [Canaan], and all thehappin 
 it comprehended. In which he and his mighty works 
 outwardly wrought were a complete figure of the work 
 of God on the believing soul ; raising it from the death 
 of sin, healing it of all its spiritual maladies, and tit- 
 ting it for the enjoyment of the divine presence, which 
 is Heaven in the substance. And as he stood in the 
 place of God outwardly to Israel, so he was likewise 
 a real and true man, as the Scriptures abundantly 
 assure us, being the son or offspring of Abraham and 
 David after the flesh ; born of an Israelitish vir</in, 
 
ON THE DIVINE BEING. 159 
 
 brought up and nursed by his parents, and was sub- 
 ject unto them until he arrived at the state of man- 
 hood ; complying faithfully with all the requisitions 
 and ordinances of the Jewish law, by which he justi- 
 fied his Heavenly Father in giving that law and those 
 commandments; proving by his faithfully fulfilling all 
 of them, that it was within the capacity and power 
 of every Israelite to have done the same, had they 
 faithfully improved the ability they had received for 
 that end ; and bv which he condemned their unfaith- 
 fulness. And the last ritual was John's water baptism, 
 by complying with which he fulfilled all tbe right- 
 eousness of the outward law and testament, and was 
 then prepared for entering upon his mission by the 
 more full effusion of the Holy Spirit, which descended 
 upon him as soon as he had finished all the work of 
 shadows relative to the law state, and which qualified 
 him for his gospel mission, in which he went forth 
 clothed with power from on high, preaching the glad 
 tidings of peace and salvation; very few, however, 
 understood or believed his doctrines, being so outward 
 and worldly-minded. And when he had finished his 
 ministration, in which he fulfilled the righteousness 
 of both the law and the gospel, setting thereby an 
 example to all his followers, — showing them that by 
 faithfulness to the operations of the same spirit and 
 power, according to the measure received, they might do 
 the same ; yea, he assured his immediate followers 
 that even greater works than these which he had 
 done, should they do. AVhen he had thus finished 
 his course, he surrendered himself to his enemies who 
 crucified him, that is his outward body, which was all 
 they could do. But when he gave up the ghost, his 
 immortal spirit rose superior to all their malice, and 
 
160 ON THE DIVINE BEING. 
 
 ascended immediately into Paradise. This ascension 
 was not visible to the outward senses ; his body was 
 laid in the tomb, — and to complete the figure of our 
 redemption, it was raised again outwardly ; by which 
 is typified the crucifixion of the old fallen man with 
 all his deeds, which is affected, by the cross of Christ, 
 as saith the apostle : ' Know ye not, that so many of 
 us as were baptized into Jesus Christ,' that is, into 
 the Spirit and power of God, ' were baptized into his 
 death ? ' Therefore we are buried with him by bap- 
 tism into death ; that like as Christ was raised up, 
 outwardly, 'from the dead by the glory of the Father, 
 even so we also should ' be spiritually raised up to 
 'walk in newness of life.' And this outward ascen- 
 sion as it was manifest to the external senses of his 
 disciples, must have been the outward man, as the 
 immortal spirit of the Saviour never was, nor ever 
 could be seen by outward eyes, — hence this outward 
 ascension was a complete type of the inward or spir- 
 itual ascension of the immortal soul of man from an 
 earthly to a heavenly state; by which it regains Para- 
 dise, and which must and will be regained by every 
 redeemed soul on this side the grave." 1 
 
 In another letter written by Elias Hicks, less than 
 three years before his decease, he says: "Thy next 
 query respecting the miraculous concepton, &c, is to 
 me a very plain, simple thing. All the external mira- 
 cles of the Jewish covenant had but one aim and end ; 
 and the miraculous conception of Jesus, and of Isaac 
 and John the Baptist were among the greatest; all 
 of which were intended to prove to that dark and 
 ignorant people, debased by their bondage, that there 
 was a living and invisible God ; for such was their 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, pp. 75, 77. 
 
ON THE DIVINE BEING. 161 
 
 degraded state that no other means seemed calculated 
 to awaken them, and raise in them a belief in that 
 invisible power that made and governed the world, 
 but an external manifestation thereof, through the 
 medium of outward miracles. And as Moses and the 
 prophets had foretold of the coming of their last great 
 prophet, it was of singular importance to that people, 
 that they should know and believe in him when he 
 came; and as they depended on outward miracles as 
 the highest evidence under that dispensation, so it is 
 not only reasonable, but even natural to suppose that 
 he would be ushered in by some miraculous display 
 of divine power. Hence the reason, likewise, of the 
 many miracles that Jesus was empowered to work 
 among them, as they were too outward and carnal to 
 receive evidence through any other medium. And 
 w^e likewise see that none but those who believed on 
 him as their promised Messiah were prepared to 
 receive and obey his last counsel and command to 
 turn from outward and external evidence to that 
 which is inward and spiritual ; ' the latter being as 
 much above the former as the gospel state is above 
 the law state, or the spirit above the letter." 
 
 " As to the divinity of Jesus Christ the son of the 
 virgin — when he had arrived at a full state of son- 
 ship in the spiritual generation, he was wholly swal- 
 lowed up into the divinity of his Heavenly Father, 
 and was one with the Father, with only this differ- 
 ence : his Father's divinity was underived, being self 
 existent; but the Son's divinity was altogether de- 
 rived from the Father, for otherwise he could not be 
 the Son of God, as in the moral relation to be a son 
 
 1 John xiv. 16, 17, and xvi. 7. 
 14* 2C 
 
162 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 of man, the son must be begotten by one father, and 
 he must be in the same nature, spirit, and likeness of 
 his father, so as to say, I and my father are one, in all 
 those respects. But this was not the case with Jesus 
 in the spiritual relation until he had gone through 
 the last institute of the law dispensation, viz., John's 
 watery baptism, and had received additional power 1 
 from on high by the descending of the Holy Ghost 
 upon him as he came up out of the water. 2 He then 
 witnessed the fulness of the second birth, being now 
 born into the nature, spirit, and likeness of the Heav- 
 enly Father, and God gave witness of it to John, say- 
 ing, ' This is my beloved Son in whom I am well 
 pleased.' 
 
 » " 8 
 
 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 § 5. The doctrine of salvation by Christ, as held by 
 the early Friends, has been exhibited in the fifth 
 Chapter of this treatise, and recapitulated in the fifth 
 section of Chapter VII. 
 
 The views of Elias Hicks on this subject are ex- 
 pressed in the following passages from his letters and 
 sermons : — 
 
 "All the persecution and cruel deaths that have 
 transpired in the world among mankind ; not only 
 the persecution and crucifixion of Jesus Christ ; but 
 also all the sufferings and martyrdom caused by 
 wicked men, have had their rise and spring from 
 man's unjust and unrighteous use of his liberty and 
 power, conferred upon him only to do his master's 
 will in all things." * * * * "Had the Israelites all 
 
 1 Luke ii. 52. " Matt. iii. 16. 
 
 3 Letters of E. H., pp. 203, 204. 
 
SALVATION BY CHKIST. 163 
 
 been faithful to the outward covenant oven them 
 through Moses, they would all have been prepared 
 to have received their Messiah in the way of his com- 
 ing, as did those that believed on him, and by which 
 the end of his coming would have been much more 
 fully answered; as all Israel then, like the disciples 
 of Jesus Christ, would willingly have passed from the 
 old, and cheerfully entered into the new dispensation. 
 Hence no crucifixion, no suffering or death of Jesus 
 Christ would have taken place ; but when his minis- 
 try on earth was finished, by fulfilling the law and 
 abolishing that outward covenant, and turning the 
 minds of the people to the inward, to the law written 
 in the heart, and when, by a life of perfect righteous- 
 ness and self-denial, he had introduced his disciples 
 into the gospel, he would then have been (like Enoch 
 and Elijah) translated, without suffering the pains of 
 death. But as Divine Wisdom foresaw that his peo- 
 ple Israel would revolt from his commandments, and 
 rebel against his law and become cruel and hard- 
 hearted, so likewise he foresaw that the wicked 
 among them would cruelly persecute and slay many 
 of the righteous, and his son Jesus Christ among the 
 rest. Therefore he inspired many of his servants to 
 testify of these things amongst them before they came 
 to pass, as warning and caution, that so those who 
 were seeking after the right way, might be preserved 
 from taking any part therein, while those who wil- 
 fully hardened their hearts against reproof might suf- 
 fer the penalties resulting from their crimes, which 
 they had committed in their own free choice, contrary 
 to the counsel and will of their Creator." 1 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, pp. 54, 55. 
 
164 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 In a letter to Dr. Nathan Shoemaker, Elias Hicks 
 wrote as follows i 1 " By what means did Jesus suffer? 
 The answer is plain — by the hands of wicked men, 
 and because his works were righteous and theirs were 
 wicked. Query. Did God send him into the world 
 purposely to suffer death by the hands of wicked 
 men? By no means; but to live a righteous and 
 Godly life (which was the design and end of God's 
 creating man in the beginning), and thereby be a 
 perfect example to such of mankind as should come 
 to the knowledge of him and his perfect life. For if 
 it was the purpose and will of God that he should die 
 by the hands of wicked men, then the Jews by cruci- 
 fying him would have done God's will, and of course 
 would all have stood justified in his sight, which 
 could not be. But it was permitted so to be, as it 
 had been with many of the prophets and wise and 
 good men that were before him, who suffered death 
 by the hands of wicked men for righteousness' sake, 
 as ensamples to those that came after, that they should 
 account nothing too dear to give up for the truth's 
 sake, not even their own lives. 
 
 "But the shedding of his blood by the wicked 
 Scribes and Pharisees and people of Israel, had a 
 particular effect on the Jewish nation, as by this, the 
 topstone, and worst of all their crimes, was filled up 
 the measure of their iniquities, and which put an 
 end to that dispensation, together with its law and 
 covenant. That, as John's baptism summed up in 
 one, all the previous water baptisms of that dispensa- 
 tion, and put an end to them, which he sealed with 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. II. p. 422, being Exhibit No. 37, by the 
 orthodox party. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 165 
 
 his blood, so this sacrifice of the body of Jesus 
 Christ, summed up in one all the outward atoning 
 sacrifices of the shadowy dispensation and put an end 
 to them all, thereby abolishing the law, having pre- 
 viously fulfilled all its righteousness, and, as saith the 
 apostle, 'He blotted out the handwriting of ordi- 
 nances nailing them to his cross;' having put an end 
 to the law that commanded them, with all its legal 
 sins, and abolished all its legal penalties, so that all 
 the Israelites that believed on him, after he exclaimed 
 on the cross, 'It is finished,' might abstain from all 
 the rituals of their law, such as circumcision, water 
 baptisms, outward sacrifices, Seventh-day sabbaths, 
 and all their other holy-days, &c, and be blameless: 
 and the legal sins that any were guilty of, were now 
 remitted and done away by the abolishment of the 
 law that commanded them, for ' where there is no 
 law there is no transgression.' But those that did 
 not believe on him, many of them were destroyed by 
 the sword, and the rest were scattered abroad in the 
 earth. But I do not consider that the crucifixion of the 
 outward body of flesh and blood of Jesus on the cross, 
 was an atonement for any sins but the legal sins of the 
 Jews; for as their law was outward, so their legal 
 sins and their penalties were outward, and these could 
 be atoned for by an outward sacrifice ; and this last 
 outward sacrifice was a full type of the inward sacri- 
 fice that every sinner must make, in giving up that 
 sinful life of his own will, in and by which he hath, 
 from time to time, crucified the innocent life of God 
 in his own soul; and which Paul calls 'the old man 
 with his deeds,' or ' the man of sin and son of perdi- 
 tion,' who hath taken God's seat in the heart, and 
 there exalteth itself above all that is called God, or 
 
 2C2 
 
166 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 is worshipped, sitting as judge and supreme. Now 
 all this life, power, and will of man must be slain 
 and die on the cross spiritually, as Jesus died on the 
 cross outwardly, and this is the true atonement, which 
 that outward atonement was a clear and full type of. 
 This the Apostle Paul sets forth in a plain manner, 
 Romans vi. 3 and 4. 'Know ye not that so many of 
 us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized 
 into his death ? Therefore we are buried with him 
 by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised 
 up from the dead,' (outwardly,) 'by the glory of the 
 Father, even so we,' having by the spiritual baptism 
 witnessed a death to sin, shall know T a being raised 
 up spiritually and so walk in newness of life." 1 
 
 In a letter of later date he writes: "As to the 
 advantage the reviewers have taken or pretended to 
 take, on what they construe as an admission on my 
 part, in my letter to Dr. Shoemaker, that the death 
 of Christ merely of itself was an atonement at all, 
 I had no such idea ; for I believe I rested it princi- 
 pally on the effects of his mission and death. As is very 
 clear, not only from the apostle's testimony where 
 he asserts that Jesus had abolished the law, and 
 'blotted out the handwriting of ordinances, nailing 
 them to his cross,' &c. ; but also by the facts which 
 followed, some of which were manifest while he was 
 with his disci [ties, in justifying them for a breach 
 of their shadowy Sabbath, and divers other things in 
 their conduct which made a breach upon the letter 
 of their law. By which the design of his mission is 
 proved, that it was purposely to put an end to that 
 law and covenant, and to introduce a better: not 
 
 1 Letters of E. Hicks, p. 124 to 12G. 
 
SALVATION BY CHRIST. 167 
 
 another outward one, but an inward one, agreeably 
 to the prophecy of Jeremiah. And this he clearly 
 and amply did in his sermon on the mount, as is be- 
 fore shown, but was finished by his last act of sur- 
 render on the cross, when he bowed his head and 
 said, 'It is finished.' At which time the vaiT of 
 the temple was rent in twain from the top to the 
 bottom." 1 
 
 In his sermon at Pine Street, Philadelphia, de- 
 livered 12th month 10th, 1826, Elias Hicks, after re- 
 ferring to "the blood of the Lamb," by which the 
 soul "is washed clean," proceeds as follows : "And 
 what is the blood of the Lamb ? It was his life, my 
 friends ; for as outward material blood was made use 
 of to express the animal life, inspired men used it as 
 a simile. Outward blood is the life of the animal, 
 but it has nothing to do with the soul ; for the soul 
 has no animal blood, — no material blood. The life 
 of God in the soul, is the blood of the soul, and the 
 life of God is the blood of God ; and so it was the 
 life and blood of Jesus Christ his son. For he was 
 born of the spirit of his heavenly Father, and swal- 
 lowed up fully and completely in his divine nature, 
 so that he was completely divine. It was this that 
 operated in that twofold state, and governed the 
 whole animal man, which was the son of Abraham 
 and David — a tabernacle for his blessed soul." 2 
 
 In the year 1829, " Six Queries " were proposed by 
 Thomas Legge tt, Jr., of .New York, and answered by 
 Elias Hicks. The last was as follows : — 
 
 Sixth Query. What relation has the body of Jesus 
 to the Saviour of man ? Dost thou believe that the 
 
 1 fetters of E. Hicks, p. 170. 2 Quaker, Vol. I. p. 62 
 
168 SALVATION BY CHRIST. 
 
 crucifixion of the outward body of Jesus Christ was 
 an atonement for our sins? 
 
 Answer. "In reply to the first part of this query, I 
 answer, I believe, in unison with our ancient Friends, 
 that it was the garment in which he performed all his 
 mighty works, or as Paul expressed it, 'Know ye not 
 that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which 
 is in you,' therefore he charged them not to defile those 
 temples. "What is attributed to that bod} 7 , 1 acknowl- 
 edge and give to that body, in its place, according as 
 the Scripture attributeth it, which is through and be- 
 cause of that which dwelt and acted in it. But that 
 which sanctified and kept the body pure (and made 
 all acceptable in him) was the life, holiness, and 
 righteousness of the Spirit. And the same thing 
 that kept his vessel pure, it is the same thing that 
 clean seth us.' " ! 
 
 "In reply to the second part of this query, I would 
 remark that I 'see no need of directing men to the 
 type for the antitype, neither to the outward temple, 
 nor yet to Jerusalem, neither to Jesus Christ or his 
 blood [outwardly], knowing that neither the right- 
 eousness of faith, nor the word of it doth so direct.' " 2 
 " The new and second covenant is dedicated with the 
 blood, the life of Christ Jesus, which is the alone atone- 
 ment unto God, by which all his pleople are washed, 
 sanctified, cleansed, and redeemed to God." 3 
 
 1 I. Pennington, Vol. III. p. 34. 
 
 2 G. Whitehead, Light and Life of Christ, Phila. ed. 1823, p. 34 
 
 3 G. Fox, Doctrinals, p. 646, and Am. ed. Vol. V. p. 365. 
 
THE DOCTRIXAL CONTROVERSY. 169 
 
 \ 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 On comparing the doctrines promulgated by Jos. 
 John Gurney with those held by Elias Hicks, it is 
 obvious that they are totally irreconcilable with each 
 other, and on a close examination it will be found, 
 that neither of those eminent men held views, in all 
 points, strictly in accordance with the writings of the 
 early Friends. This is manifest from their own de- 
 clarations. "Were I required," says J. J. Gurney, 
 " to define Quakerism, I should not describe it as the 
 system so elaborate^ wrought out by a Barclay, or 
 as the doctrines and maxims of a Penn, or as the 
 deep and refined views of a Pennington, for all these 
 authors have their defects as well as their excellen- 
 cies. I should call it the religion of the New Tes- 
 tament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with- 
 out diminution, without addition, and without com- 
 promise." l 
 
 Elias Hicks writes, in relation to the atonement: 
 "Our primitive Friends stopped short in that matter, 
 not for want of faithfulness, but because the day, 
 that was in some respects still dark, would not admit 
 of further openings, because the people could not 
 bear it, therefore it was to be a future work." 2 
 
 It will probably be admitted by the impartial 
 inquirer, that the doctrines of Elias Hicks are much 
 
 1 Brief Remarks on Interpretation of Scripture, p. 16. 
 
 2 Letters of E. Hicks, d. 66. [To Phebe Willis.] 
 IV — 15 
 
170 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 nearer to the standard of early Quakerism than those 
 of Joseph John Gurney, and there is reason to con- 
 clude that each of them honestly believed his views 
 to be, in all essential points, nearly the same as those 
 of Fox, Penn, and Barclay. 
 
 In this examination, it must be borne in mind that 
 no Yearly Meeting or other organized body of Friends 
 in England or America has ever given its official sanc- 
 tion to all the doctrinal views of either Gurney or 
 Hicks. All Friends concur in referring to the New 
 Testament as the repositoiy of their doctrines, to the 
 Holy Spirit as their expounder, and to the writings 
 of the early Friends as corroborative evidence. 
 
 As both Joseph John Gurney and Elias Hicks mani- 
 fested in life and conversation a Christian spirit, we 
 cannot doubt the reality of their devotion, or the sin- 
 cerity of their professions. The discordance between 
 their doctrinal views was doubtless the result of edu- 
 cation and position, increased, perhaps, by a difference 
 in the natural tendencies of their minds. 
 
 It has often been asked, how can we reconcile such 
 a diversity of doctrines among those who profess to 
 be led by the Spirit of Truth in their ministrations? 
 This ha?, doubtless, been a stumbling-block to many 
 sincere, seeking souls. It can only be removed by 
 bearing in mind the frailty of human nature, and the 
 condescension of Infinite Goodness. The Spirit of 
 Truth is infallible in itself; but man being fallible, is 
 liable to mistake its dictates, unless preserved in 
 watchfulness and humility. 
 
 It is the experience of all truly religious persons 
 that, in their seasons of private devotion, subjects of 
 deep interest to their spiritual welfare are sometimes 
 opened to their view, and instruction is imparted to 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 171 
 
 them in the language of impressions made upon the 
 mind. By this means they are enlightened in regard 
 to the duties of life, aud sometimes doctrinal subjects 
 are opened to the understanding; but it does not 
 appear that every doctrine of Christianity is always 
 revealed in clearness, even to the most devoted minds. 
 !N"ow we must remember that ministers of the gospel 
 are, in regard to their religious experience, taught in 
 the same manner as others, by the illumination of 
 divine grace, and on some subjects the light may not 
 have shone, leaving them still under the influence of 
 traditional opinions. Even the Apostle Paul acknowl- 
 edged, "We know in part and we prophesy in part/' 
 * * * * "For now we see through a glass darkly." 1 
 They who are called to the gospel ministry are, at 
 times, moved by an indescribable impulse, accompa- 
 nied with love to God and man, to communicate to 
 others the truths that have warmed their own hearts. 
 This preparation for religious service is thus described 
 by the Psalmist: "My heart was hot within me; while 
 I was musing, the fire burned: then spake I with my 
 tongue." 2 
 
 "When the Holy Spirit illuminates the understand- 
 ing, all its faculties are quickened and invigorated. 
 It is then that the chambers of memory are unlocked, 
 and he who is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven, 
 "brings forth out of his treasures things new and 
 old; " passages of Scripture adapted to the occasion 
 are brought to mind, and sometimes seen in a new 
 light; personal experience is revived and pertinently 
 applied, and even the knowledge of the natural sci- 
 ences stored in the mind may be brought forth and 
 made subservient to the illustration of heavenly truth. 
 
 — — — ■ _ ■ ^ 
 
 1 1 Cor. xiii. 9-12. 2 Ps. xxxix. 3. 
 
172 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 A minister of the gospel, who is watchful and obe- 
 dient, will generally be preserved from meddling with 
 things too high fur him, but if at any time he should 
 be induced by undue excitement, or the association 
 of ideas, to touch upon subjects on which he is not 
 authorized to speak, he will, of course, handle them 
 in accordance with his preconceived opinions. In 
 almost every reflecting mind, some subjects or points 
 of doctrine have claimed peculiar attention, and as- 
 sumed unusual importance; these are always knock- 
 ing for admission ; and nothing short of entire self- 
 renunciation will enable a minister to avoid their 
 introduction at times when they are not authorized 
 nor appropriate. 
 
 From these causes, a diversity of expression has 
 resulted, even among ministers who have received a 
 measure of the holy anointing; and it has often been 
 observed that a discourse begun under the solemniz- 
 ing influence of divine truth, has before its conclu- 
 sion degenerated into a mere recitation of speculative 
 opinions that did not profit the hearers. If we have 
 evidence that some, who occasionally err in this man- 
 ner, are at other times favored "to minister in the 
 ability which God giveth," should we not reverence 
 the condescension of Infinite Goodness, and, remem- 
 bering our own weakness, be slow to censure our 
 fellow-servants ? 
 
 It has already been observed, that Friends in 
 America generally held the views inculcated by Fox, 
 Penn, Pennington and Barclay, and that great stress 
 was laid upon the grace of God or spirit of Christ, as 
 the efficient cause of salvaiion. This statement is 
 fully sustained by the " Introduction to Christian Ad- 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 173 
 
 vices," published in the year 1808, by the Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia, viz. : — 
 
 " The following extracts have been compiled for the 
 benefit of the members of our Yearly Meeting, that 
 observing the travail of the Church under various con- 
 cerns which, in divine wisdom, have been communi- 
 cated for its weighty attention, they may be drawn 
 to the principle of Life and Light manifested in the 
 mind, which points out the path of duty, and can 
 alone preserve therein. 
 
 " Our ancient Friends and their faithful successors 
 to the present day have earnestly labored to turn the 
 attention of all to this pure spirit, knowing from expe- 
 rience that it is the means appointed by God for 
 effecting our salvation, and the only foundation of true 
 religion and worship. As by this we have been led 
 into divers testimonies which have distinguished us 
 from most other professors of the Christian name, and 
 fervently desire that all our members may walk by 
 the same rule, and mind the same tiling; thus everv 
 one filling his place in the body, we shall grow up 
 into Him in all things, who is the Head, even 
 Christ." 
 
 These sentiments are further corroborated by the 
 memorials of deceased Friends, issued by the same 
 Yearly Meeting during a long series of years. 
 
 The following extract is from the "Testimony of 
 the Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia for the South- 
 ern District concerning Deborah Evans, wife of Wil- 
 liam Evans." " At another time she said, that some 
 time back, upon hearing some parts of the jNew Testa- 
 ment read, respecting our Saviour, the query occurred, 
 'What do I know of a Saviour?' and it was presently 
 followed by the evidence that she had felt a principle 
 15* IV— 2D 
 
174 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 in her own mind, which had shown her what was 
 right and what was wrong, and that as she at- 
 tended to it, it would prove a Saviour to her — and 
 then said these expressions were brought to her re- 
 membrance, ' To know thee the only true God, and 
 Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent is life eternal.' " 
 
 Such being the sentiments generally held by 
 Friends composing the Yearly Meetings of Phila- 
 delphia, New York, and Baltimore, and to a con- 
 siderable extent entertained by those of other Yearly 
 Meetings on this continent; it is not surprising that 
 the promulgation of the doctrines held by prominent 
 Friends in England and their coadjutors in America, 
 should have occasioned a blaze of religious contro- 
 versy. Between the years 1819 and 1828, a large 
 number of ministers from Groat Britain visited the 
 meetings of Friends in America, some of them re- 
 maining several years. 
 
 There are many persons now living, who can well 
 remember the effects produced by the ministrations 
 of William Forster, Isaac Stephenson, George Withey, 
 Anna Braithwait, Elizabeth Robson, George Jones, 
 Ann Jones, and Thomas Shillitoe. 
 
 William Forster, in his religious opinions, coin- 
 cided entirely with Joseph John Gurney.' His min- 
 istry was however frequently of a practical char- 
 acter, and at times remarkable for its baptizing power. 
 The variety of his subjects, the appropriateness of 
 his illustrations, the purity of his language, and the 
 depth of his feelings, rendered him an impressive 
 and instructive minister of the gospel. 
 
 Isaac Stephenson was considered a plain, simple,, 
 
 1 See Chapter VII. Letter of W. Forster. 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 175 
 
 worthy friend, and a good minister. Most of the 
 others were doctrinal in their communications, and 
 being impressed with a belief that many Friends 
 had embraced dangerous opinions, were frequent and 
 severe in their denunciations against heresy. It is 
 much to be lamented that their zeal for what are 
 called orthodox doctrines should have induced them 
 to aid in building up a party having in view the 
 suppression of what they deemed heresy, and resort- 
 ing for its accomplishment to arbitrary and oppressive 
 measures that had the most disastrous results. 
 
 One of the favorite schemes of the ministers from 
 England and their coadjutors in America, which 
 however proved unsuccessful, was the appointment 
 of a convention to be composed of delegates from 
 all the Yearly Meetings of Friends, for the purpose 
 of promoting uniformity in their codes of discipline. 
 There can be no doubt that the promoters of this 
 measure had also in view a uniformity in doctrines, 
 and the adoption of a common declaration of faith, 
 which, since the separation, they have carried into 
 effect among themselves. 1 
 
 This scheme was considered, by a large number 
 of Friends, very objectionable, inasmuch as it would 
 place in the hands of a few men the power to re- 
 model the code of discipline, and perhaps to impose 
 a confession of faith not adapted to the condition of 
 the several Yearly Meetings. Like the councils 
 held in the fourth century under the imposing de- 
 sign of promoting uniformity of faith, it would prob- 
 ably have resulted, as they did, in abridging re- 
 ligious liberty and spreading dissension. 
 
 1 See Testimony of the [Orthodox] Yearly Meetings in Amer- 
 ica, signed by Elisha Bates, clerk of the General Committee. 
 
176 THE LOCTEINAL CONTKOYERSY. 
 
 The first attempt to introduce this measure was 
 made at Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, where it met 
 with so much opposition that it could not be adopted, 
 but a postscript was added to the epistles addressed to 
 other Yearly Meetings, suggesting it as a subject for 
 consideration. At the Yearly Meeting held in Xew 
 York in 1817, it was considered and rejected, Eli as 
 Hicks being one of those who opposed it. At the 
 ensuing Yearly Meeting held in Baltimore, the sub- 
 ject was taken up, and after much deliberation, it 
 was concluded to inform Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
 ing that it was the judgment of Baltimore Yearly 
 Meeting, " advantages would arise to the Society 
 from a conference of the several Yearly Meetings on 
 this continent, by suitably qualified Friends appointed 
 by each of them, in order that each Yearly Meeting 
 may be put in possession, through this medium of 
 the general state of society in America." This mi- 
 nute, it will be observed, did not embrace the orig- 
 inal design, nor did it contemplate any co-operation 
 with the Yearly Meeting of London. It appears 
 not to have been satisfactory to the promoters of the 
 scheme, and no further progress at that time was made. 
 
 The design, however, was not abandoned, as we 
 learn by the following extract from a letter written 
 in 1822, by Hugh Judge, an eminent minister of 
 Ohio Yearly Meeting. "William Forster, the Eng- 
 lish Friend, revived in our Yearly Meeting last fall, 
 the old subject, namely, the appointment of a con- 
 gress as proposed in your Yearly Meeting some years 
 past; and although our Yearly Meeting the year be- 
 fore had unitedly laid it asleep, yet William Forster* 
 pressed the matter so much, that Friends, although 
 contrary to the sense of the meeting, condescended 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 177 
 
 to take it on minute and appointed a committee to 
 consider it and report, and called on the women to 
 join them in it. But the women were wiser than 
 the men, and dismissed the subject without further 
 troubling themselves with it, and the men's com- 
 mittee reported that no way opened to take any step; 
 and the meeting was for dismissing it, but William 
 Forster urged the matter so hard that he prevailed 
 on the meeting to refer it over to the next year for 
 consideration." 1 
 
 In the year 1825, William Forster, being in Balti- 
 more, had an interview with Evan Thomas, an emi- 
 nent and devoted minister of the gospel, then in his 
 87th year, and their conversation, on account of an 
 extraordinary prediction then uttered, was written 
 down, soon after it occurred, by a Friend who was 
 present at the time. 
 
 William Forster, referring to some incidents that 
 had occurred in the course of his recent visit to the 
 Southern and Western States, remarked : " He was 
 convinced in many places through which he had 
 passed, that unsound views were entertained by many 
 of our members, and that he believed Elias Hicks 
 had been instrumental in spreading doctrines and 
 opinions that could not be owned by the Society of 
 Friends. To this Evan Thomas replied that he be- 
 lieved Elias Hicks did hold some peculiar views 
 which, perhaps, were not entertained by Friends gen- 
 erally ; they were his honest opinions, however, 
 and there could be no doubt were sincerely enter- 
 tained by him. Upon this, William Forster ob- 
 served, that some of these views were radically un- 
 
 1 Narrative of Causes which led to the Separation, &c., p. 21. 
 
 2D2 
 
178 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 sound and subversive of the fundamental and essen- 
 tial doctrines of Christianity, and then emphatically 
 and with much earnestness of manner, asked Evan 
 Thomas, if in any public communication or private 
 conversation, he had ever heard Elias Hicks say, 
 ' Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ?' After some 
 pause, Evan Thomas replied, ' I do not recollect that 
 I ever did, yet he may have used these expressions, 
 without exciting my attention to them. I have not 
 felt it to be my place to sit as a watchman at the gate, 
 to recollect and record particular words falling from 
 the lips of any Friend, either in his public testimo- 
 nies or private conversation. I generally endeavor to 
 feel after and satisfy myself of the source whence pub- 
 lic communications flow, and if they are accompanied 
 by the Divine influence and power, I do not look 
 critically into the exact words that may be used. I 
 have long been acquainted with Elias J licks and be- 
 lieve him to be a consistent, faithful testimony 
 bearer; and although I may not agree with him in 
 all his views, yet I can own him as a brother he- 
 loved, and have no doubt he has been called to the 
 ministry by the Head of the church.' To this Wil- 
 liam Forster replied : ' I consider him to be alto- 
 gether unsound in his views — that he has done a 
 great deal of harm, by extensively spreading dan- 
 gerous opinions among Friends in this country, and 
 am convinced, a separation must and will take place in 
 the Society in America.' "' 
 
 From these expressions, uttered two years before 
 the separation, we may conclude, that Wm. Forster, 
 and probably others of the English visitors, looked 
 
 1 Narrative of the Causes which led to the Separation, &c, p. 37 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 179 
 
 forward to such a separation as had taken place in 
 Ireland, in the beginning of the century when the 
 Orthodox party remained in the ascendancy and their 
 opposers were scattered as sheep without a shepherd. 
 The two cases, however, were not parallel ; for the 
 views advanced by those who were called Separatists 
 in Ireland, both in regard to doctrine and discipline, 
 were not the same as those held by Elias Hicks and 
 his friends, and moreover the Friends in America 
 were less submissive to English authority than their 
 brethren in Ireland. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting of Friends in Ireland, before 
 the date of those troubles, was, " in matters of faith 
 and principle," subordinate to that of London, and 
 has since continued in that condition ; whereas the 
 Yearly Meetings in America had never acknowledged 
 such subordination, but each of them in its govern- 
 ment was independent of all others, though united 
 in Christian fellowship. 
 
 The views advanced in sermons and conversations, 
 and promulgated in the writings of English Friends, 
 were controverted by some of the most prominent 
 Friends in America, and embraced by others. 
 
 The latter class, in ranging themselves as the ad- 
 vocates of orthodoxy, did not all hold the precise 
 views of Joseph John Gurney, but they all lent their 
 countenance and support to the ministers from Eng- 
 land, and used language in their religious communi- 
 cations ivhich led the public to believe that they were 
 thoroughly orthodox. Subsequent developments have 
 shown that they were not united in doctrine, and 
 the consequence has been, controversy and division 
 among themselves, accompanied with feelings not 
 
180 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 less adverse to each other than those they manifested 
 towards Elias Hieks. 
 
 In speaking of the two parties composing the So- 
 ciety between the years 1822 and 1828, it is neces- 
 sary, for the sake of perspicuity, to designate them 
 by different names, and no reasonable objection can 
 be made to the use of those chosen by themselves 
 respectively. The class who adhered to the English 
 doctrines assumed the name of Orthodox, as appears 
 by their publications, and especially by their two 
 bills in chancery addressed to the governor and 
 chancellor of New Jersey in the year 1828. l 
 
 One of their counsel, Isaac II. Williamson, de- 
 clared, also, on their behalf, "We are not dissatis- 
 fied with the name given to us. Ever since the 
 fourth century when the controversy arose between 
 the Arians and the Trinitarians, those who adhered 
 to what are termed trinitarian doctrines have been 
 called 'Orthodox.'" 2 By this appellation I shall 
 therefore distinguish them, without vouching for its 
 literal correctness. The other class were, by the Or- 
 thodox, called Hicksites, but they continually and 
 persevering! y disclaimed the title, being unwilling to 
 acknowledge any other name than that of Friends. 
 In their answer to the Bill in Chancery filed against 
 them in New Jersey, they say, "That in the said 
 Chesterfield Preparative Meeting of Friends, at Cross- 
 wicks, the minor party assuming the name of the Or- 
 thodox party, have separated from the majority, who 
 still claim and are entitled to the primary and an- 
 cient title of Friends, and have endeavored to bestow 
 upon them the name of Hicksites, but which term 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 7, 32. a Arguments of Counsel, p. 60. 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 181 
 
 the said Society of Friends altogether disclaim, and 
 deny that they are the followers of any man or set of 
 men ; but are endeavoring conscientiously to main- 
 tain the regular discipline and government of the 
 Society of Friends; — that they believe in the doc- 
 trines of the Christian religion as set forth in the 
 New Testament, and as professed by ancient 
 Friends." 1 This class will, therefore, in this w T ork, 
 be designated as Friends. 
 
 In the doctrinal controversy which continued for 
 many years, both parties claimed to be the genuine 
 successors of the early Friends, alike in doctrine and 
 practice, and each charged the other with a depar- 
 ture, in important particulars, from the original doc- 
 trines of the Society. In order to sustain these as- 
 sertions, many publications were issued consisting 
 chiefly of extracts from the writings of the early 
 Friends, which were generally one-sided ; each party 
 selecting those passages which favored its own views. 
 This method of conducting a controversy does not 
 always arise from disingenuousness ; it frequently 
 springs from that quality of human nature which 
 induces almost every man to regard with peculiar 
 interest that which concerns himself or his party, 
 and to overlook that which concerns others. 
 
 This may be illustrated by reference to the effect 
 generally produced upon those who, standing on an 
 eminence, survey the district of country in which 
 they live. In the scene outspread before them, they 
 note with deep interest their own neighborhood or 
 city, and especially their own habitations ; but they 
 often overlook other features of the landscape of equal 
 
 1 Foster's Reports, Vol. I. p. 24. 
 16 
 
182 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 general interest, and these, if seen, make less im- 
 pression on the memory. 
 
 In like manner, the members of every sect in 
 Christendom note with most interest, and remem- 
 ber with most accuracy, those passages of Scripture 
 that support their own views. 
 
 In this examination, it is important to observe, 
 that the orthodox party, while claiming to hold the 
 ancient doctrines of the Society, classed themselves 
 among the " Trinitarian sects," and asserted that 
 there was a remarkable harmony " as regards most of 
 the doctrines of the Christian religion" between the 
 early Friends and Christian professors generally. 1 
 
 Thus they say, in their Pleadings in Chancery: 
 " In what among Protestants are commonly deemed 
 the great essentials of Christianity, the religious sen- 
 timents of the Society of Friends, or people called 
 Quakers, are in accordance with the doctrines com- 
 monly entertained by the other Protestant sects of 
 Christians who arose after the dawn of the great Prot- 
 estant reformation in Europe." * * * * "That the 
 principal difference between the people called Qua- 
 kers and other Protestant Trinitarian sects, in regard 
 to the doctrine of the Trinity, is, that the latter at- 
 tach the idea of individual personage to the three, 
 as what they consider a fair logical inference from 
 the doctrines expressly laid down in the Holy Scrip- 
 tures. The people called Quakers on the other hand, 
 considering it a mystery beyond finite, human concep- 
 tion, take up the doctrine as expressly laid down in the 
 Scripture, and have not considered themselves war- 
 ranted in making deductions however specious." 
 
 1 Testimony of Thos. Evans, Foster's Report, Vol. I. p. 298. 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 183 
 
 "In the second place, the people called Quakers 
 have always believed in the doctrine of the atone- 
 ment: that the divine and human nature of Jesus 
 Christ the Saviour were united ; that thus united he 
 suffered, and that through his sufferings, death, and 
 resurrection, he atoned for the sins of men." * * * * 
 "That such are the doctrines entertained and adopted 
 by the ancient Society of Friends, and that the same 
 doctrines are still entertained by the Orthodox party 
 aforesaid, to which party your orator belongs. That 
 these doctrines are with the said religious Society 
 fundamental, and any individual entertaining sen- 
 timents and opinions contrary to all or any of the 
 above-mentioned doctrines, is held not to be in the 
 same faith with the Society of Friends, or people 
 called Quakers, and is treated accordingly." 1 
 
 Samuel Bettle, clerk of the Orthodox Yearly 
 Meeting of Philadelphia, testified as follows: 
 
 " Question. Did ancient Friends accord in senti- 
 ment with the other Protestant sects, in regard to the 
 atonement, the trinity, and the divine authority of 
 the Scriptures, and the divine nature of the Saviour. 
 
 " Answer. As far as I know the profession of other 
 Protestant sects on these subjects, Friends agree with 
 them in substance, as explained in my examination in 
 chief. On reflection, I do believe there is a discrimi- 
 nation in respect to the Scriptures. Friends do not 
 profess to believe the Scriptures to be the word 
 spoken of by the evangelist John; — they hold that 
 Christ was the Word, but they believe that the Scrip- 
 tures were the product of revelation from God, and 
 in that sense the words of God." 2 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 1, 6, 7. 2 Ibid. p. 78. 
 
184: THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 As we know of no Protestant sect that profess to 
 believe the Scriptures to be "the Word spoken of by 
 the Evangelist John" — the Word that was in the "be- 
 ginning with God and was God, 1 — we may infer that 
 the question was answered by Samuel Bettle in the 
 affirmative. 
 
 From this testimony, given in a court of equity, we 
 must conclude that the orthodox party then professed 
 to hold substantially the same doctrines, in regard to 
 the Scriptures, the Trinity, original sin, and atone- 
 ment, that were held by the Church of England and 
 " other Protestant Trinitarian sects" and we know 
 from the testimony of the Bishop of Norwich and 
 other distinguished churchmen, that Joseph John 
 Gurney was, in their estimation, thoroughly orthodox. 
 It follows, as a necessary consequence, that the Or- 
 thodox party in Philadelphia, New York, and Balti- 
 more professed, in L S JS, the same doctrines as Joseph 
 John Gurney, although many leading members of that 
 part}- have since disavowed them. 
 
 Their disavowal may be found in "An Appeal for 
 the Ancient Doctrines of the Religious Society of 
 Friends," published by direction of the Orthodox 
 Yearly Meeting, held at Arch Street House, Philadel- 
 phia, in the year 1847. This document is chiefly a 
 review of the doctrinal writings of Joseph John Gur- 
 ney, containing many extracts from his works, with- 
 out the insertion of his name. After contrasting his 
 views with those of the early Friends, in relation to 
 reason and faith, imputative righteousness, justifica- 
 tion, and sanctification : the flesh and blood of Christ; 
 the distinct personality of Father, Son, and Holy 
 
 See Cruden's Cone., article Word. 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 185 
 
 Spirit; and the resurrection of the body; they proceed 
 as follows : — 
 
 " These passages here brought together contain 
 sentiments in many respects at variance with those 
 held by our ancient Friends, and always professed by 
 our Religious Society. There are others of similar 
 character scattered through these works, and many 
 which are unsatisfactory, either on account of want 
 of clearness and consistency with our principles, or 
 containing terms which Friends do not approve. That 
 in various places Christian doctrine is supported on 
 Scriptural ground is undoubtedly true ; and it may be 
 owing to this circumstance that many, even in our 
 own Society, have not appreciated the weighty objec- 
 tions to which, in many respects, these writings are 
 liable. We believe the sentiments contained in the 
 passages which we have quoted have had an injurious 
 influence, in producing feelings of discord and di- 
 vision among Friends ; and however these feelings 
 may have been increased by other causes, they are, 
 we believe, mainly to be attributed to the publication 
 and circulation of those writings." * 
 
 As the most elaborate of those writings, "The Es- 
 says on Christianity " appeared in 1825, and some 
 others of Gurney's doctrinal writings were published 
 at an earlier date ; it is very remarkable that his 
 errors were not detected and exposed by the lynx- 
 eyed critics among the orthodox party in Philadelphia 
 prior to the lamented separation of 1827. Had they 
 then seen and acknowledged that the doctrines called 
 orthodox are not consistent with primitive Christian- 
 
 1 An Appeal, &c, p. 51. 
 16* 2E 
 
186 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 ity, as professed by the early Friends, the calamitous 
 effects of that separation might have been avoided. 
 
 In addition to their "Appeal for the Ancient Doc- 
 trines," we have, in a recent publication, the corrobo- 
 rating testimony of Jonathan Evans, the prime mover 
 and leader of the opposition to Elias Hicks and his 
 friends. 
 
 In the year 1837, he wrote to John Wilbur a letter 
 containing the following passage : — 
 
 "This man, J. J. Gurney, because he has written 
 much, is considered very learned, highly polished, and 
 an acute reasoner, and being very rich, and living in 
 high style, is greatly caressed, and esteemed as almost 
 a prodigy among us. I have perused a great deal of 
 his writings, and have been sorely distressed at the 
 darkness and confusion which is almost inseparable 
 from their contents. The Hebrew and Greek lan- 
 guages being very limited, one word in them will 
 sometimes embrace several significations, some of 
 which will be in entire contrast with others ; this he 
 has caught at, and then made use of those opposite 
 senses to vary the present translation of the Scrip- 
 tures, and to promote his purpose in undervaluing 
 and contradicting the solid sense and judgment of our 
 ancient Friends, that he may the more readily intro- 
 duce and propagate Episcopalian doctrines. lie tries 
 to make out that the eating of the flesh, and drinking 
 the blood of Christ, means a belief in his incarnation, 
 thus lowering down that deep experience and blessed 
 fellowship in spirit with the Lord Jesus, in his bap- 
 tisms and sufferings, to a mere assent of the human 
 mind, — that the gospel, which is preached in or to 
 every human being, means the outward preaching of 
 the gospel doctrines, that is, the declaration of the 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 187 
 
 atonement of Christ; that the name of Jesus does not 
 signify his power, but only to ask of the Father that he 
 would grant our petitions, merely because of his be- 
 loved Son, Jesus Christ ; that therefore we are not to 
 look for the immediate influence of the Spirit, as a 
 qualification to pray, but to push forward into this 
 offering whenever we incline to it ; and many other 
 changes he makes which I can call by no other name 
 than perversions. He endeavors to make out that our 
 primitive Friends were under mistaken views, in 
 order that he may with more facility lay waste the 
 doctrines and testimonies they held, and prepare us 
 to embrace new schemes which will be more accept- 
 able to the unregenerate man ; liberate us from 
 the mortifying operation of the cross of Christ, and 
 cause us as a Society to be more respected by the car- 
 nal, superficial professors of religion in the several 
 denominations." l 
 
 In reply to these severe strictures on the doctrines 
 and motives of J. J. Gurney, it may safely be asserted 
 that he was sincere in his professions, and therefore 
 entitled to respect ; but we can only surmise what 
 motives could have induced the leaders of the Ortho- 
 dox party in 1827-28, to give their countenance and 
 support to the promulgation of doctrines they have 
 since disavowed. 
 
 It is worthy of note, that two English ministers, 
 Thomas Shillitoe and George Jones, who, while in 
 America, were understood by the public to preach the 
 doctrines commonly called orthodox, found it incum- 
 bent on them, in the prospect of death, to bear their 
 testimony against the writings of Joseph John Gur- 
 
 1 Journal and Cor. John Wilbur, p. 228. 
 
183 THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 
 
 ney, and one of them confessed his contrition for not 
 having done it, as required by a sense of duty, at an 
 earlier date. Three days before his decease, Thomas 
 ShilHtoe requested a friend to commit to writing the 
 following declaration "against the generality of the 
 writings of J. J. Gurnev: " "I declare the author is 
 an Episcopalian, not a Quaker. I apprehend J. J. 
 Gurney is no Quaker in principle. Episcopalian views 
 were imbibed from his education, and still remain 
 with him. I love the man for the work's sake, so far 
 as it goes, but be has never been emptied from vessel 
 to vessel, and from sieve to sieve, nor known the bap- 
 tism of the Holy Ghost, and of fire to cleanse the floor 
 of his heart from bis Episcopalian notions. He has 
 spread a linsey -woolly garment over our members; 
 but in a future day it will be stripped off, it will be 
 too short for them, as they will be without Jesus 
 Christ the Lord. This is my dying testimony, and I 
 must sign it. If I had been faithful, T should have 
 expressed it in the last Yearly Meeting of ministers 
 and elders [1836], but I hope I shall be forgiven. Oh ! 
 Lord accept me with the best I have." 1 
 
 George Jones, in a letter, dated 9th of 5th month, 
 1839, addressed to the members of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Ministers and Elders, London, after expressing 
 his decided disapprobation of the writings of J. J. 
 Gurney, thus continues : " These things have rested 
 much on my mind, particularly during my present ill- 
 ness, and it must be very evident that J. J. Gurney 's 
 interpretations of the Scriptures are so contrary to 
 those of the Society from its first commencement, 
 that if his interpretations are to prevail, then the 
 
 1 J. Wilbur's Narrative, p. 345. 
 
THE DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY. 189 
 
 Society must change its ground, and become an in- 
 consistent mixture of Quakerism and Episcopalian- 
 ism." * * * * '-'These things have deeply impressed 
 and afflicted the minds of our dear Friends Thomas 
 Shillitoe and John Barclay, who are in mercy 
 gathered to their everlasting rest." 1 
 
 As the objectionable writings of Joseph John Gur- 
 ney had been published and widely circulated by 
 Friends twelve years and upwards, before these dis- 
 avowals were made, may we not conclude that the 
 unfaithfulness to manifested duty, so feelingly con- 
 fessed by Thomas Shillitoe, was no less attributable 
 to many other Friends in England and America, who 
 gave their countenance to doctrines that, in their 
 hearts, they did not approve? Alas! for poor human 
 nature ; those Friends could denounce the unpopular 
 views attributed to Elias Hicks, but they could not 
 bear witness against the innovations of popular the- 
 ology, when dressed up in attractive language and 
 recommended by the possessors of wealth and high 
 social position. 
 
 May we not apply to Jonathan Evans and his party, 
 the language he used in relation to Joseph John 
 Gurney: they supported a scheme which would "lib- 
 erate us from the mortifying operation of the cross of 
 Christ and cause us as a Society to be more respected 
 by the carnal, superficial professors of religion in the 
 several denominations." According to their own 
 mode of reasoning, they were responsible for the 
 doctrines preached by the English Friends, some of 
 whom held precisely the views of Gurney, and yet 
 were acknowledged by the orthodox party in Phila- 
 delphia as sound gospel ministers. 
 
 1 J. Wilbur's Narrative, p. 348. 
 2E2 
 
190 MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLE 
 
 CHAPTEE X. 
 
 DISCIPLINE OF THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. 
 
 The origin and character of that Bystem of Church 
 government which, in its essential features, was re- 
 commended by George Fox, and. with some modifi- 
 cations, adopted by the Society of Friends, have 
 been noticed in the preceding narrative, 1 and more 
 fully described in a previous work. 1 It is therefore 
 deemed needless to enter into its details, further than 
 may be requisite to promote a clear understanding 
 of the transactions to be related. 
 
 MEETINGS FOB DISCIPLINE. 
 
 The meetings for discipline in the Society of 
 Friends are called Preparative, Monthly, Quarterly, 
 and Yearlv. The Preparative meeting generally eon- 
 sists of a Bin el e congregation : it is not a meeting of 
 record ; its purpose is to prepare and report busin< ss 
 for the Monthly meeting to which it is subordinate. 
 The Monthly meeting may consist of a Bingle con- 
 gregation, or be composed of Beveral Preparative meet- 
 ings contiguous to each other. This is considered 
 the executive organ of the Society, being intrusted 
 with the power of receiving or disowning members, 
 granting or accepting certificates of removal, direct- 
 ing and recording the solemnization of marriag< 
 keeping a register of births and deaths, providing 
 
 1 See Hist. Vol. I. Chap. XVIII.. and Vol. II. Chap. X. 
 
 8 See Dissertation on Discipline, Jannev's Life of G. Fox. p. 479. 
 
MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 191 
 
 for the support of the poor and the education of 
 their children, inquiring at stated periods into the 
 condition of the Society within its limits, and for- 
 warding an account of the same to the Quarterly 
 meeting. The Quarterly meeting is usually com- 
 posed of several Monthly meetings contiguous to 
 each other, and in some cases it is held alternately 
 at different places. Its purpose is to receive the re- 
 ports from the Monthly meetings, which are subordi- 
 nate to it, and embody them in a general report to 
 the Yearly meeting. It has a general supervision of 
 the Monthly meetings composing it. 
 
 The Yearly meeting is composed of all the Quar- 
 terly meetings within certain limits, which send re- 
 presentatives to attend it and lay before it a written 
 report. The representatives have no more power 
 than other members in attendance, except that they 
 are required to meet together and nominate a clerk, 
 and to examine and report upon any other business 
 that may be referred to them. Any member, who 
 may feel himself aggrieved by the judgment of a 
 Monthly meeting, may. after a copy of his testimony 
 of disownment is delivered to him, give due notice 
 of his intention to appeal to the Quarterly meeting; 
 and if the Quarterly meeting shall decide against 
 him, he may in like manner appeal to the Yearly 
 meeting, whose judgment in the case is final. 
 
 The Yearly meeting exercises a general supervi- 
 sion over all the meetings within its limits, and issues 
 advices in relation to the state of the Society and the 
 support of its testimonies. It is the highest tribunal 
 in the Society, and has power to enact, modify, or 
 abrogate the rules of discipline ; but this authority 
 is usually exercised with great caution and delibera- 
 
192 MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 
 
 tion, and only with the general concurrence of those 
 in attendance. When an alteration in the rules of 
 discipline is thought desirable, the usual course is, 
 for a member "feeling the concern " to propose it in 
 his Monthly meeting, and if there approved, the pro- 
 position is forwarded in the report to the Quarterly 
 meeting, where it is considered, and if united with, 
 forwarded in the report to the Yearly meeting. 
 
 The several Yearly meetings throughout the world 
 are independent of each other, except the Yearly 
 meeting of Dublin, which, "in matters of faith and 
 principle," is subordinate to that of London. The 
 Yearly meetings prior to the year 1827, were as fol- 
 lows : London, Dublin, New England, New York, 
 Philadelphia, Baltimore, Virginia, North Carolina, 
 Ohio, and Indiana. They kept up an epistolary cor- 
 respondence, and, in all essential points, their codes 
 of discipline were nearly the same. 
 
 In all the meetings for discipline, every member 
 not under dealings for a breach of discipline, is at 
 liberty to sit and participate in the proceedings. 
 The men and women meet in separate apartments, 
 and are co-ordinate branches of the same meeting, 
 each having a clerk of its own, but in some cases 
 they appoint joint committees to prepare business in 
 which both branches are interested. The clerks are 
 nominated bv committees, and after consideration 
 appointed by the meeting. It is the duty of the 
 clerk to gather the sense or judgment of the mem- 
 bers present, and to record their decisions on such 
 questions as may come before them. 
 
 "In these solemn assemblies," says Win. Penn, "no 
 one presides among them after the manner of the 
 assemblies of other people, Christ only being their 
 
MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 193 
 
 president, as he is pleased to appear in life and wis- 
 dom in any one or more of them, to whom, whatever 
 be their capacity or degree, the rest adhere with a 
 firm unity, not of authority but conviction; which is the 
 divine authority and way of Christ's power and spirit 
 in his people; making good his blessed promise 
 that ' He would be in the midst of his, where and 
 whenever they were met together in his name, even 
 to the end of the world.' " 
 
 It is obvious that a church thus constituted cannot 
 act upon the principle of political bodies where a ma- 
 jority governs; and it is still more objectionable for 
 a minority to assume the right to govern. The only 
 way to preserve "the unity of the Spirit in the bond 
 of peace" is for every member who participates in 
 such meetings to draw nigh to the Fountain of light 
 and life, in order to ask wisdom of God, " who giveth 
 to all men liberally and upbraideth not." While 
 waiting upon Him in this frame of mind, each mem- 
 ber is at liberty, under a sense of duty, to express his 
 views with meekness, and if they proceed from the 
 pure teachings of the Spirit of Truth, they will meet 
 the witness for truth in other minds, and being re- 
 sponded to, will generally prevail over the meeting. 
 It sometimes occurs that one of the younger mem- 
 bers, being unbiassed and wholly resigned to follow 
 his impressions of duty, becomes the instrument to 
 point out the right course, which being acceded to by 
 others, is adopted by the meeting ; but in most cases 
 the older and more experienced members are expected 
 to take the lead in all matters of importance. Although 
 there may, at first, be some diversity of sentiment, it 
 seldom happens that a meeting where Divine love 
 prevails, is long in doubt concerning any matter that 
 IV— 17 
 
194 MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 
 
 is necessary to be decided. A meeting may be thrown 
 into confusion by entering into the discussion of 
 questions with which it has no proper concern, in 
 which case, stepping out of its province, it has no right 
 to expect divine guidance. If a considerable degree 
 of unanimity cannot be attained, it is best not to insist 
 upon a decision, but rather to wait and adjourn from 
 time to time, or 'dismiss the question. When disci 
 pline cannot be exercised with good feelings and tol- 
 erable unanimity, it is better to stand still ; for if unity 
 and love do not prevail, it is an evidence that the 
 Spirit of Christ does not sanction our proceedings, 
 and, like the Israelites of old, we should be careful 
 not to move forward so long as " the cloud rests upon 
 the tabernacle, whether it be two clays, or a month, or 
 a year." ■ 
 
 This system of church government, being in accord- 
 ance with the principles of Christianity, is beautiful 
 and perfect in theory; and so long as the Spirit of 
 Christ was permitted to bear rule, producing love and 
 unity in the body, it was completely successful in prac- 
 tice. It is not, however, so well adapted to a divided 
 church, in which jealousy, party spirit, and contention 
 prevail. The difficulty and delicacy of the duty im- 
 posed on the clerk, of collecting and recording the 
 judgment of the meeting, without a vote being taken, 
 is so great, that in times of excitement and conflicting 
 opinions, few persons can be found competent to the 
 task. It is maintained by some that, not numbers, 
 but weight of religious character, is the true ground 
 of decision. But this does not remove the difficulty; 
 
 1 This paragraph is reproduced from my Dissertation on Chris- 
 tian Discipline, appended to Life of G. Fox, p. 486. 
 
MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 195 
 
 for who is competent to estimate the weight and de- 
 cide the preponderance when party spirit shakes the 
 scales? If the clerk is to be the sole judge, he and a 
 small minority united with him in sentiment, may 
 carry their measures over the heads of a large major- 
 ity more weighty than themselves as regards religious 
 experience and consistency of conduct. 
 
 In view of these difficulties, it may be asked, Shall 
 we then, in seasons of unusual excitement and aerita- 
 tion, determine questions in meetings for discipline 
 by the voice of a majority, as they do in most other 
 religious societies? To adopt the system of voting in 
 Friends' meetings for discipline would be a departure 
 from the principles of church government originally 
 established, and would evince a want of confidence in 
 the promise of Christ, a Lo! I am with you always, 
 even unto the end of the world." " For when two or 
 three are gathered together in my name, there am I 
 in the midst of them." 
 
 By adhering to the course pursued by the Society 
 in its earlier days, all the difficulties alluded to may 
 be overcome. No question was decided against the 
 judgment and continued opposition of a respectable 
 minority. If such a minority decidedly objected to 
 any measure, it was not forced through the meeting, 
 but postponed or abandoned, unless a more general 
 acquiescence could be attained. Some inconveniences 
 may, at times, attend this course, but great benefits 
 will ultimately result from it. The dangers attendant 
 on hasty action may thus be avoided, and the exercise 
 of patience, forbearance and condescension will pro- 
 mote the growth of all the qualities that adorn and 
 ennoble the Christian character. 
 
 To decide questions of church discipline in this 
 
196 MEETINGS FOR DISCIPLINE. 
 
 maimer requires the assent of more than a bare ma- 
 jority of the members in attendance ; it implies a 
 general acquiescence, and does not call in question 
 that great and beneficent principle, which lies at the 
 root of civil and religious liberty in America — the 
 right of the majority to govern. 
 
 In the printed epistle of the Yearly Meeting of 
 London, dated 1735, the following advice is given in 
 relation to meetings for discipline: "We recommend 
 as a means very conducive to the preservation of 
 Friends, a people of one heart and one way, for the 
 good of themselves and their children after them, that 
 the discipline of the church in the several meetings 
 instituted for that purpose be kept up and managed 
 in a spirit of wisdom and love. Let all things in those 
 meetings be done with charity ; let the love of God in 
 an especial manner rule in their hearts; and therein 
 though sometimes different sentiments may arise, yet 
 will every particular member have the same thing in 
 view, viz., the glory of God and the good of his church 
 and people, and in this singleness of heart they will 
 best promote the great end and service of those 
 meetings." 
 
 These advices correspond with the views of Geo. 
 Fox, who, in his epistles, frequently exhorts Friends 
 "to hold all their meetings in the power of God." 
 
 "So Friends are not," he says, "to meet like 
 a company of people about town or parish busi- 
 ness, neither in their men's nor women's meetings; 
 but to wait upon the Lord ; and feeling his power 
 and spirit to lead them and order them to his glory ; 
 that so whatsoever they may do, they may do it to 
 the praise and glory of God, and in unity in the faith, 
 
MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 197 
 
 and iii the spirit, and in fellowship in the order of 
 the gospel, &C." 1 
 
 OVERSEERS. 
 
 The Rules of Discipline require that in every 
 Monthly Meeting of Friends, a proper number of 
 judicious men and women Friends be appointed to 
 the Station of Overseers; "whose duty it shall be to 
 exercise a vigilant and tender care over their fellow- 
 members, that if anything repugnant to the harmony 
 and good order of the Society appears amongst 
 them, it may be timely attended to. And to prevent 
 the introduction of all unnecessary and premature 
 complaints into meetings of discipline, it is advised 
 that if any member shall have cause of complaint 
 against another, it be mentioned to the overseers, 
 who are to see that the party complained of has been 
 treated with, according to gospel order, previously to 
 the case being reported to the Preparative or Monthly 
 Meeting." 
 
 MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 
 
 The Society of Friends, from its rise to the pres- 
 ent day, has always maintained that gospel ministry 
 is not of man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ, 
 agreeably to the apostolical charge : — " As every 
 man hath received the gift, even so minister the same 
 one to another as good stewards of the manifold 
 grace of God. If any man speak, let him speak as 
 the oracles of God ; if any man minister, let him do 
 it as of the ability which God giveth : that God in 
 all things may be glorified, through Jesus Christ, to 
 
 1 Fox's Epistles, pp. 349, 350. 
 17* IV — 2 F 
 
198 MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 
 
 whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever." 
 1 Pet. iv. 10. 
 
 Soon after the rise of the Society, the ministers 
 occasionally met together for consultation and mutual 
 aid, and as early as the year 1672 a Yearly Meeting 
 of ministers was held in London. 
 
 One of the objects contemplated in the establish- 
 ment of such meetings is thus stated in an epistle of 
 George Fox, dated 1074. "At your general assem- 
 blies of the ministry at London, or elsewhere, ex- 
 amine as it was at first, whether all the ministers 
 that go forth into the countries, do walk as becomes 
 the gospel ; for that you know was one end of that 
 meeting, to prevent and take away scandal ; and to 
 examine whether all do keep in the government of 
 Christ Jesus, that preach him, and in the order of 
 the gospel, and to exhort them that do not. For the 
 foundation is already laid which is Christ, and his 
 government is set up, of the increase of which there 
 is no end." 
 
 The first establishment of meetings for worship 
 and discipline in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, has 
 already been related. 1 
 
 ■ 
 
 A Yearly Meeting of ministers was also instituted 
 at an early date, as appears by the following minute 
 of the general Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia 
 in the year 1665, viz. : "It is agreed that Friends in 
 the ministry do meet together on First-day morning 
 at the seventh hour, before the public general meet- 
 ing, in sueh place as shall be prepared by the public 
 Friends in each town where the meeting shall be 
 held that year," At the same time it was concluded 
 
 1 Hist., Vol. II. pp. 374, 384. 
 
MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 199 
 
 that the General Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania 
 and New Jersey should thereafter meet alternately at 
 Philadelphia and Burlington. 
 
 In the year 1714, the Yearly Meeting for Pennsyl- 
 vania and New Jersey, at the request of some of the 
 Quarterly meetings, issued the following minute: 
 11 This meeting agrees, that the Quarterly meeting do 
 recommend to each Monthly meeting within their 
 respective limits that they choose two or more 
 Friends out of each Monthly meeting, (where meet- 
 ings of ministers are or shall be held,) to sit with 
 the ministers in their meetings; taking care that the 
 Friends chosen for that service be prudent, solid 
 Friends, and that they do carefully discharge their 
 trust in such matters, and in such manner as the 
 Monthly meeting shall from time to time see occa- 
 sion to appoint them." 1 
 
 This appears to be the first advice issued by the 
 Yearly Meeting in relation to the appointment of 
 elders, and it is observable that they were to dis- 
 charge their trust in obedience to the directions of 
 the Monthly meetings. Ministers and Elders held 
 Preparative, Quarterly, and Yearly Meetings of their 
 own, which were frequently called Select Meetings. 
 At these meetings, Queries relating to their conduct 
 and conversation, aud the soundness of the ministry, 
 were periodically considered and answered. It w r as 
 expressly provided by a rule of discipline that they 
 should not " in any w T ise interfere with the business 
 of any Meeting for Discipline" Their meetings were 
 not classed among the meetings for discipline, having 
 no power to control the other members, nor to pro- 
 pose any rules relating to faith or practice. 
 
 1 MS. Discipline of 1762. 
 
200 MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 
 
 In 1797, the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia is- 
 sued the following minute : "When the ^ifts of min- 
 isters are considered and approved by a Monthly 
 meeting, and a minute thereof forwarded to the 
 Quarterly meeting of Ministers and Elders, the sense 
 and concurrence of that meeting ought to be had 
 before such minister be reputed as a received and 
 approved minister, or admitted to sit in the meetings 
 of Ministers and Elders, or travel abroad in the min- 
 istry." And finally, the rule of discipline now in 
 force was established in 1806, that the Preparative 
 meeting of Ministers and Elders (within the limits 
 of each Monthly meeting) should take the initiatory 
 step in the recommendation of minister* When 
 any Friend has frequently appeared as a minister, 
 and that meeting apprehends it is seasonable and 
 proper to bring the Bubject before the Monthly meet- 
 ing, it is at liberty to do so; and if the Monthly 
 meeting unites in believing that a ffift in the min- 
 istry has been committed to the individual, the case 
 is to be forwarded to the Quarterly meeting of Min- 
 isters and Elders, and if concurrence is there ex- 
 pressed, the Friend is to be considered an approved 
 minister. 
 
 It will be observed that all the proceedings in such 
 cases are predicated upon the ground that a gift in 
 the ministry can only be conferred by the Head of 
 the Church, and that no ecclesiastical authority can 
 give a call to that solemn service. When a gift has 
 been conferred, it is the duty of the Church to ac- 
 knowledge it, and t<> give Buch counsel and encour- 
 agement as may be deemed appropriate. When a 
 minister thus acknowledged, has a prospeet <A' trav- 
 elling and appointing meetings beyond the limits 
 
MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 201 
 
 of his Quarterly meeting, it is advised that the sub- 
 ject be laid before the Monthly meeting, and if con- 
 curred with, that a certificate be granted by that 
 meeting, recommending him to the Christian care 
 and attention of Friends where he may be called to 
 labor. If the prospect of religious service be ex- 
 tensive, the certificate thus granted is to be laid be- 
 fore the Quarterly meeting for discipline ; and if the 
 field of labor lies " beyond the sea," the concurrence 
 of the Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elders is 
 required. The meeting last concerned in sanction- 
 ing such religious visits, is required to see that a 
 suitable companion be provided to travel with the 
 minister, and if deemed needful, that pecuniary aid 
 for the expenses of the journey be furnished ; but 
 such aid is not offered to those who have means to 
 pay their own expenses without diminishing the com- 
 fort of their families ; nor is anything in the nature 
 of a compensation for preaching sanctioned by the 
 discipline or approved writings of Friends. 
 
 It was the advice of Geo. Fox, frequently reiterated, 
 that Friends should not oppose or judge one another 
 in meetings for divine worship. Thus he writes: 
 "All Friends in your meetings do not quench the 
 Spirit. And take heed, and do not judge one another 
 in the meetings, but have patience until the meeting 
 be done : so that if any have anything upon him to 
 speak to another, he may speak to him after the meet- 
 ing is done; that will cover one another's weakness 
 and not hurt others." 1 
 
 In accordance with this advice a rule of discipline 
 was made, and is still in force, viz.: "As the occasion 
 
 1 Epistles of G. F., p. 128. 
 2F2 
 
202 MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDERS. 
 
 of our religious meetings is solemn, a care should be 
 maintained to guard against anything that would tend 
 to disorder and confusion therein ; when any think 
 they have aught against what is publicly delivered, 
 they should speak to the party privately, and if any 
 shall oppose a minister in his or her preaching or 
 exhortation, or keep on the hat, or show any remark- 
 able dislike to such when engaged in prayer, let them 
 be speedily admonished in such manner as may be 
 requisite, unless the ministry of the person against 
 whom the uneasiness is expressed, has been disap- 
 proved by the Monthly Meeting." 1 
 
 The Yearly Meeting minute of 1714, already quoted, 
 for the appointment of elders, was subsequently ex- 
 plained by another minute to apply to both sexes, and 
 women as well as men were accordingly appointed to 
 that service by the Monthly Meetings. 
 
 The term for which elders were appointed was not 
 mentioned in the Yearly Meeting's minute, nor was 
 the power of removal by Monthly Meetings expressly 
 stated. These questions will be found important in 
 the prosecution of this examination, and can best be 
 determined by reference to the usage which ensued 
 under the rule. If any of the Monthly Meetings ap- 
 pointed elders for a limited term, or exercised the 
 right of removing them from their stations, we may 
 conclude that the power they exercised was then 
 conceded. 
 
 The first appointment made by Middletown Monthly 
 Meeting, Bucks County, was in the 12th month, 1714. 
 The minute reads as follows: "This meeting doth ap- 
 point Thomas Baynes and John Penquite (according 
 
 Bait. Y. M., Book of Disc, as adopted in 1806. 
 
MEETINGS OF MINISTEKS AND ELDERS. 203 
 
 to the order of the Yearly Meeting) to sit with the 
 ministers in their meetings ; and that there be a new 
 election every year or oftener, if there be occasion." 1 
 In the 7th month, 1729, the same meeting placed on 
 record, that Thomas Baynes being removed from 
 among them, they appointed John Wildman along 
 with Adam Harker, " to serve in his stead until further 
 orders" 2 From 1730 the Middletown records contain 
 no expressed limitation of the term for which elders 
 were appointed. 
 
 Falls Monthly Meeting, held 11th mo. 1714, made 
 its first appointment of elders without expressing in 
 the minute any limitation as to their term of service. 
 And in the 11th month, 1726, two of the elders for- 
 merly appointed having, "through age," grown weak 
 and infirm, and not "well able to travel," two others 
 "were appointed in their places." 3 
 
 Newark Monthly Meeting, (since called Kennet,) 
 and Concord Monthly Meeting, both of which be- 
 longed to a Quarterly Meeting then called Chester, 
 sometimes made their appointment of elders without 
 limitation, but at other times they were appointed "to 
 serve till further orders." 
 
 At Concord Monthly Meeting, in the year 1778, a 
 minute was made as follows : " This meeting hav- 
 ing some time ago recommended to the Quarterly 
 Meeting of Ministers and Elders, Hannah Carter 
 as an elder, do now discontinue her from being a 
 member thereof." The same Monthly Meeting, in 
 the vear 1782, reinstated Hannah Carter in the sta- 
 
 1 Middletown M. M. Records, A., p. 122. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 233. 
 
 8 Falls Records, 1st Vol. to 1731. 
 
204 MEETINGS OF MINISTEKS AND ELDERS. 
 
 tion of an elder, at the request of Birmingham Pre- 
 parative Meeting. 1 
 
 In 1777, a member of Concord Monthly Meeting, 
 having violated a rule of discipline, made an acknowl- 
 edgment for the offence, which was accepted ; but he 
 being at the time an elder, was removed from that 
 station by the Monthly Meeting, and information 
 thereof given to the Select Meeting. 
 
 The Monthly Meeting of Buckingham, from 1720 
 to 1746, expressed in its minutes on the appointment 
 of elders no limitation as to time, but in the latter 
 year a Friend was appointed to that station, "till fur- 
 ther appointments." 
 
 These selections are sufficient to show that the 
 power to remove elders from their stations was exer- 
 cised by the Monthly Meetings, when they deemed it 
 expedient, which, however, was seldom the case. The 
 Yearly Meeting's minute of 1714, recommending the 
 appointment of elders, directs that Monthly Meetings 
 shall take care that the Friends chosen for that ser- 
 vice " do carefully discharge their trust," which was 
 doubtless understood to imply that they might be 
 removed from the station, if their trusts were not 
 properly and faithfully discharged. 
 
 In 1806, a rule of discipline was adopted, which, 
 without abridging the power of Monthly Meet- 
 ings to deal with ministers and elders, requires 
 the Select Meetings to extend timely and tender 
 care over them, provided their cases have not been 
 taken up by a "meeting for discipline.'" The min- 
 ute reads as follows: "If any acknowledged mem- 
 ber of our Meetings of Ministers and Elders shall at 
 any time be thought, by negligence, unfaithfulness, 
 
 1 Michener's Retrospect, p. 172. 
 
MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND ELDEKS. 205 
 
 or otherwise, to have lost his or her service in that 
 station, so as to become burthensome and the subject 
 of uneasiness, (yet not so as to be under the care of a 
 meeting of discipline on that account, or for miscon- 
 duct,) it is advised that a timely and tender care be 
 extended to such person, according to gospel order: 
 first by the individuals concerned, and then by the 
 Preparative Meeting of Ministers and Elders to which 
 he or she may belong. Should these labours prove 
 unavailing, report of the case should be made to the 
 Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, where 
 a few Friends should be deputed to assist the said 
 Preparative Meeting in a further extension of labour 
 with the party ; if this also prove unavailing, and on 
 report thereof to the said Quarterly Meeting, it ap- 
 pears that the said Preparative Meeting has fully dis- 
 charged its duty to the individual, the case should 
 then be transmitted to the Monthly Meeting for Dis- 
 cipline of which the party is a member, and left under 
 its care, and he or she ought from that time to refrain 
 from attending any such meetings until they shall 
 again be recommended or appointed as at first." l 
 
 On examination of the clause in parentheses it will 
 appear that the Select Meetings cannot interfere with 
 any case where a minister or elder is under the care 
 of a meeting of discipline for misconduct, or on account 
 of having become burdensome through " negligence, 
 unfaithfulness, or otherwise." ■ 
 
 This rule of discipline was doubtless intended to 
 proride a method of exercising a tender care over 
 ministers and elders without unnecessary exposure, 
 in order to reconcile differences and prevent the dis- 
 
 1 Book of Discip., Bait. Y. M., 1806. 
 18 
 
206 MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. 
 
 cord that mi^ht arise from the discussion of their 
 cases in the Monthly meetings. But it does not de- 
 prive the meetings for discipline of original jurisdic- 
 tion in such cases, and certainly never was intended 
 to screen ministers and elders from being dealt with 
 by Monthly meetings when occasion required it. In 
 the progress of this examination it will be seen that 
 the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders in 
 Philadelphia denied the authority of a Monthly Meet- 
 ing to remove some of its elders from office when they 
 had ceased to be in unity with it, thus interfering 
 with the business of a meeting for discipline in viola- 
 tion of a rule established by the Yearly Meeting. 
 
 MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. 
 
 The institution of a Meeting for Sufferings by the 
 Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania and New Jersey 
 has already been noticed. 1 
 
 It was designed, as its name indicates, to relieve 
 the sufferings of Friends, who at that time were ex- 
 posed, in the frontier settlements, to the ravages of 
 war. Its functions were afterwards enlarged, and 
 its power being long continued in the same hands, 
 continued to increase until it became an institution 
 of great importance, and exercised a controlling in- 
 fluence. As some of the disturbances in the Society 
 originated in the action of this body, the nature of 
 its functions and the extent of its power demand 
 our attention. 
 
 In the year 1756, a committee appointed by Phila- 
 delphia Yearly Meeting, recommended that a fund 
 be raised for the relief of suffering Friends, and that 
 
 1 History of Friends, Vol. III. Chap. XII. 
 
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. 207 
 
 it be placed under the care of a committee twelve of 
 whom should be nominated by the Yearly Meeting 
 and four by each of the Quarterly meetings. The 
 recommendation was adopted by the meeting, as was 
 also the following clause of the report, viz. : — 
 
 " That the services proposed to be transacted by 
 them be : To hear and consider the cases of any 
 Friends under suffering, especially such as suffer from 
 the Indians or other enemies, and to administer such 
 relief as they may find necessary, or to apply to 
 government or persons in power on their behalf. To 
 correspond with the Meeting for Sufferings, or the 
 Yearly Meeting of London ; and to represent the 
 state of the affairs of Friends here ; and in general, 
 to represent this meeting, and appear in all cases 
 where the reputation of Truth and our religious So- 
 ciety are concerned ; provided that they do not meddle 
 ivith matters of faith or discipline, not already deter- 
 mined in this Yearly Meeting; and that at least 
 twelve should concur on all occasions ; and that in 
 matters of great importance, notice be given or sent 
 to all the members of the committee." 1 
 
 Such was the origin of the Meeting for Sufferings, 
 or Representative Committee, of Philadelphia Yearly 
 Meeting. It was at the same time intrusted, by a 
 minute of the Yearly Meeting, with the care and 
 application of charitable legacies and donations, and 
 required to give advice, when needed, concerning 
 the titles of land or other estate belonging to the 
 several meetings. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting of 1757 adopted the following 
 minute : " The minutes of the Meeting for Sufferings 
 
 1 MS. Book of Discipline, 1762. 
 
208 MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. 
 
 having been read," * * * * "it is unanimously 
 agreed that the said meeting should be continued, 
 and that the Friends nominated last year be con- 
 tinued members of that meeting; who in conjunc- 
 tion with those chosen by the several Quarterly meet- 
 ings, shall be and continue the Meeting for Sufferings 
 until the respective Quarterly meetings shall nominate 
 and appoint others in the rooms or places of those chosen 
 by them last year" l 
 
 Buck's Quarterly Meeting, in the 11th month, same 
 year, after noticing on its records the foregoing min- 
 ute, continued two, and appointed two other Friends, 
 as representatives "for the ensuing year." 
 
 For some vears after the institution of the Meet- 
 ing for Sufferings, the Yearly Meeting adopted each 
 year a minute for its continuance, "as at present con- 
 stituted, reselling to each Quarterly meeting the right of 
 changing any of the members in the places where they 
 were respectively nominated." Or, as expressed in 
 another of the minutes, " reserving to the Quarterly 
 meetings the right of changing any of their members 
 when they think proper." 2 The Yearly Meeting, in 
 1764, directed, that "when there is an apparent neg- 
 lect of the members nominated by the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, the said Meeting for Sufferings is authorized to 
 appoint other Friends in the room of such, if, after 
 seasonable admonition, they continue to neglect or 
 decline attending; and to acquaint the Quarterly 
 meetings respectively, where they observe any nomi- 
 nated to represent them continue neglectful of giving 
 proper attendance, in order that such Quarterly meet- 
 ings may appoint other s." 
 
 1 Michener's Retrospect, p. 33, and Yearly Extracts, 1757. 
 
 2 Minutes of Phila. Yearly Meeting, 1757 to 1762 inclusive. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 209 
 
 In the year 1768, the following minute was adopted 
 by the Yearly Meeting: "The proceedings of the 
 Meeting for Sufferings for the year past being read 
 and approved, it is agreed to continue that meeting 
 agreeable to former minutes, until this meeting may 
 think it necessary to order the contrary." 
 
 Thenceforward the Meeting for Sufferings was 
 considered a standing committee, responsible to the 
 Yearly Meeting for its proceedings ; but the right of 
 the Quarterly meetings to change their representatives 
 in it when they thought proper, was never taken from 
 them nor relinquished. Some of the Quarterly meet- 
 ings most distant from the city of Philadelphia, gen- 
 erally appointed for their representatives Friends 
 residing in or near the City for the sake of conve- 
 nience in attending; thus the power of this body, 
 being concentrated within a narrow compass, and 
 long continued in the same hands, gave rise to a feel- 
 ing of independence and self-importance which ulti- 
 mately led the ruling members of that body to maintain 
 that they were appointed for life and could not be 
 removed by the Quarterly meetings. 
 
 CHAPTEE XI. 
 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILADELPHIA ELDERS. 
 
 Ox entering upon the investigation of the transac- 
 tions that led to the Separation of Friends in Amer- 
 ica, it is proper to state, that our chief reliance for 
 evidence of the facts will be the testimony, oral and 
 documentary, given " in a cause at issue in the Court 
 
 18* 2G 
 
210 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 of Chancery of the State of New Jersey." 1 In rela- 
 tion to these witnesses, it was observed by Chief Jus- 
 tice Ewing: "In their opinions, in their inferences, 
 in their feelings, we observe, as might be expected, 
 a difference among the witnesses, but it is pleasing 
 to meet with no such collision of facts, as to render 
 necessary the delicate and arduous duty of weighing 
 and comparing evidence."" 
 
 The witnesses on both sides were men of good 
 moral character, and doubtless intended to state the 
 truth under the solemn sanction of an affirmation ; 
 but inasmuch as all men are liable to be misinformed 
 by others, or misled by their own excited feelings, it 
 is deemed necessary to compare the testimony of the 
 opposite parties on all important points. 
 
 The doctrinal views of Elias Hicks having been 
 examined in a preceding chapter, and deduced from 
 his own writings and printed discourses, it is not 
 deemed requisite to notice the statements of his ad- 
 versaries on this point, further than may be needful 
 in the investigation of facts. It appears from the 
 testimony of two of the opponents of Elias Hicks, — 
 Thos. Willis, a minister, residing at Jericho, Long 
 Island, and Samuel Parsons, of Flushing, clerk of 
 New York Yearly Meeting, — that they had for many 
 years been in the practice of noting down expressions 
 of Elias Hicks, which they heard in his public minis- 
 try. 3 These isolated expressions not being written 
 immediately on their utterance, but from memory, 
 and separated from the context, were liable to be 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Phila. 1831. 
 
 2 Report of the Trenton Trial, Phil. 1834, p. 11. 
 
 3 Testimony of T. Willis, Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 160, 161, 
 and of Samuel Parsons, Vol. I. 173, 174, 201. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDEES. 211 
 
 misapprehended, and were doubtless made nse of 
 greatly to the prejudice of the speaker. In addition 
 to this ungenerous method of treasuring up, from 
 year to year, scraps of doctrinal matter deemed he- 
 retical, Thomas "Willis and his wife entered into a 
 correspondence with Elias Hicks under a profession 
 of religious concern for his welfare. The first letter 
 of Phebe Willis was answered by Elias Hicks in the 
 year 1818, the second in 1820, and he answered a 
 letter of Thomas Willis in 1821. "A number of 
 weeks' 1 after the reception of Elias Hicks' letter, 
 Thomas Willis proposed to him a friendly interview, 
 to which Elias agreed, and requested that his letter 
 should be brought to him, as he had no copy of it. 
 Thomas Willis brought the letter as requested, but 
 confesses that he took the liberty of keeping a copy 
 without the consent of the writer. He then said, 
 "Shall we exchange letters?" 1 Elias assented: 
 giving up the letters of Willis, and receiving his 
 own, but was not aware that a copy had been kept 
 for secret service. 
 
 The letter of Elias Hicks to Thomas Willis, thus 
 surreptitiously obtained, was circulated among the 
 orthodox party without his knowledge, and printed 
 without asking his consent. When he discovered 
 the course that had been pursued towards him, he 
 very justly accused Thomas Willis of " treachery." 
 
 The first open manifestation of disrespect to Elias 
 Hicks on the part of elders in Philadelphia occurred 
 in the year 1819. He was then on his return from 
 Ohio Yearly Meeting, and having attended a meet- 
 ins: at Darbv, several Friends residing there went to 
 
 1 Testimony of T. Willis, Vol. I. p. 111. Ibid. p. 119. 
 
212 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 the city, and attended with him the Monthly Mat- 
 ing at Pine Street. He delivered some close doc- 
 trine to those who stood as rulers and leaders amons: 
 the people. "They were," he said, "going round 
 and round as it were, like the children of Israel, and 
 not advancing forward ; and he called on the young 
 people in a very affectionate manner not to rest in 
 the traditions of their fathers, but to go forward and 
 advance the work of reformation." He was very 
 earnest in his opposition to slavery, and had long 
 borne a faithful testimony against the use of the pro- 
 duce of slave-labor. On this occasion he was pointed 
 in his remarks on that subject, and intimated that 
 there were some who had not stood faithful in the 
 maintenance of this testimony which they had at 
 some former period supported. Having spoken in 
 the men's meeting, he expressed a concern that he 
 felt to visit the women Friends in their meeting for 
 discipline. Jonathan Evans, an elder of that meet- 
 ing, expressed some disapprobation of it; but a large 
 number of Friends expressed their full unity with 
 his being left at liberty, and he accordingly went. 
 Isaac Lloyd, an elder, was appointed to go with him. 
 They had not been long in the women's apartment, 
 when a proposition was made hj Jonathan Evans to 
 adjourn the meeting, alleging that they were not 
 qualified, he thought, to proceed with the business, 
 and said that it had been a very trying or painful 
 meeting to him. Several Friends expressed their 
 disapprobation of adjourning while Elias was en- 
 gaged in the women's meeting, it being considered 
 an unusual, if not an unprecedented proceeding. 
 There were, however, a few who concurred with 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDEKS. 213 
 
 Jonathan Evans, and the meeting was accordingly 
 adjourned. 1 
 
 This transaction, being considered an affront of- 
 fered to Elias Hicks, produced a great excitement, 
 and although it may appear unimportant in itself, 
 yet it developed feelings of jealousy and distrust that 
 continued to increase and spread among Friends. 
 
 In order to account for the extraordinary course 
 pursued by Jonathan Evans, it was remarked that 
 he had recently felt himself relieved from his scruples 
 in regard " to the produce of slave-labor, after having 
 abstained from it for many years, and that he felt 
 aggrieved by the severe rebuke administered by Elias 
 Hicks." It is, however, always unsafe, and often un- 
 just, to resort to conjecture for the motives of human 
 conduct. The course pursued by Jonathan Evans 
 in relation to slave-grown produce was similar to that 
 of John Comly, as recorded in his Journal. He felt 
 it his duty for many years to abstain from the use of 
 West India produce cultivated by slave-labor, but 
 afterwards felt relieved from his scruples in this re- 
 spect, and came to the conclusion that the burden had 
 been laid upon him for the discipline of his own 
 mind, and that it had been salutary. 2 Being con- 
 scious of the purity of his own motives, he was will- 
 ing that others should exercise their Christian free- 
 dom, and was therefore not wounded by the stric- 
 tures of Elias Hicks, who, as early as the year 1811, 
 had published his " Observations on Slavery," main- 
 taining that it was principally supported " by the 
 
 1 Testimony of Halliday Jackson (an eye-witness). Foster's 
 Report, Vol. II. pp. 39, 40. 
 
 2 J. C's Journal, p. 39. 
 
 2G2 
 
214 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDEKS. 
 
 purchasers and consumers of the produce of the slaves' 
 labor." 
 
 The next demonstration of hostility to Elias Hicks 
 by the elders in Philadelphia was in the 9th month, 
 1822. 
 
 It appears Irom the testimony of Abraham Lower, 
 corroborated by that of Joseph Whitall, an Orthodox 
 minister, that at an unofficial meeting of a part of the 
 members of the Meeting for Sufferings, after that meet- 
 ing had adjourned, measures were devised to obstruct 
 the religious labors of Elias Hicks, on account of 
 alleged false doctrines that he had declared three 
 months before in his oivn Yearly Meeting of New York. 
 
 Abraham Lower, a minister of the Society, and a 
 member of the Meeting for Sufferings, being ques- 
 tioned, teptified as follows: "I was about to enter 
 the meeting-house at the time appointed for our con- 
 vening, when Samuel Bettle, who stood at the door, 
 or just outside, desired me, in a low tone of voice so 
 that I could understand it, to ' stop at the rise of 
 the meeting.' I left him there and passed in as 
 usual. At the close of that meeting, a number, 
 I suppose ten or twelve of us, were convened; — after 
 sitting a little while quiet, Jonathan Evans rose, as 
 I understood, and stated the object of the meeting 
 pretty much in these words, to the best of my recol- 
 lection : ' It is understood that Elias Hicks is coming 
 on here, on his way to Baltimore Yearly Meeting. 
 Friends know that he preaches doctrines contrary to 
 the doctrines of our Society, that he has given un- 
 easiness to his friends at home, and they can't stop 
 him; and unless we can stop him here, he must go 
 on.' Joseph Whitall remarked, in corroboration of 
 that assertion of the unity of his friends at home, — 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 215 
 
 of their difficulty of stopping him, I should say, — 
 that his own Monthly meeting and Quarterly meet- 
 ing, and two thirds of the Yearly meeting were with 
 him." 1 
 
 Joseph "Whitall testifies : " There were a few Friends, 
 Ministers and Elders, who did stop together after the 
 rise of the Meeting for Sufferings, I think in Ninth 
 month of that year, and had the subject of Elias's 
 unsoundness discussed a little amongst them. A 
 very short statement was given, both by Richard 
 Jordan and myself, of what we knew of our own 
 knowledge — what we had heard him declare." 2 
 
 On this information, two or three elders were 
 named to wait on Elias Hicks, when he should arrive 
 in the city, although it was well known that he was 
 travelling with the approbation of his Monthly and 
 Quarterly meetings, and bearing their credentials 
 with him. 
 
 This irregular and unwarrantable proceeding shows, 
 on the part of those ministers and elders who were 
 engaged in it, a usurpation of power then without 
 precedent in the Society. The Book of Discipline 
 of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting contained the follow- 
 ing rule: "If any in the course of their ministry 
 shall misapply, or draw unsound inferences, or wrong 
 conclusions from the text, or shall misbehave them- 
 selves in point of conduct or conversation, let them 
 be admonished in love and tenderness by the elders 
 or overseers where they line." 
 
 It was not stated that Elias Hicks had preached 
 unsound doctrines in Philadelphia, — the alleged 
 heresies had been uttered in the time of the Yearly 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 355, 356. 2 Ibid. I. p. 247. 
 
216 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 Meeting in New York; his fellow-members there had 
 not objected, and he received from his Monthly and 
 Quarterly meetings, some months after, a clear certifi- 
 cate to travel as a minister. 
 
 The attempt proved abortive: — he pursued his 
 way to Baltimore Yearly Meeting, where his labors 
 in gospel ministry both in meetings for worship and 
 those for discipline were deemed edifying, and ac- 
 knowledged to be acceptable to Friends. 1 After 
 leaving Baltimore he attended the Southern Quar- 
 terly Meeting held at Little Creek, Delaware, and 
 thence he proceeded to Philadelphia. 
 
 There were in attendance at the Southern Quar- 
 terly Meeting Ezra Comfort and Isaiah Bell, mem- 
 bers of another Quarter, who took exceptions to 
 some of the sentiments expressed by Elias Hicks at 
 a public meeting for worship. Instead of making 
 known their objections to him, in a friendly manner, 
 agreeably to gospel order, they went to some of the 
 elders of Philadelphia and reported what they deemed 
 his unsound doctrines. In this the}' committed two 
 errors : first, in not asking a private interview with 
 him ; secondly, in reporting the case to those who had 
 no authority to notice it, for according to discipline 
 and usage, the elders of the Southern Quarterly 
 Meeting in attendance, if they were dissatisfied with 
 his doctrines, were the only ones authorized to treat 
 with him in that case. 
 
 It appears, however, that some of the elders in 
 Philadelphia, being already prejudiced against Elias 
 Hicks, and not at all reluctant to exercise their 
 power, were determined to have an interview with 
 
 1 Testimony of Halliday Jackson. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 21" 
 
 him in relation to the charges made by Comfort and 
 Bell, as well as the allegations of Joseph "Whitall 
 respecting his discourses in New York. 1 
 
 Soon after his arrival in the city of Philadelphia, 
 he was waited on by a committee of elders, supposed 
 to be those who were designated after the close of 
 the Meeting for Sufferings in the 9th month pre- 
 vious. As the charges they brought related to sen- 
 timents alleged to have been uttered without the 
 limits of Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, he denied 
 their authority to question him, but on their assuring 
 him they came in love as brethren, he was willing to 
 answer them, and they went away apparently satis- 
 fied. 2 Whatever report they may have made of the 
 interview, it does not appear to have satisfied the 
 other elders, who persisted in their determination to 
 interrogate him further. For this purpose, the male 
 elders from the five Monthly Meetings in Philadel- 
 phia were summoned to meet in an official capacity, 
 and ten of them demanded an interview. Elias 
 Hicks denied their authority to question him in re- 
 gard to matters that occurred beyond their jurisdic- 
 tion, but offered to produce certificates expressive of 
 the unity and concurrence of his Monthly and Quar- 
 terly Meetings with him in his present service. In 
 compliance, however, with the advice of some of his 
 friends, he agreed to meet the elders in Green Street 
 Meeting-house. As his accusers intended to bring 
 witnesses to endeavor to sustain their charges, he 
 deemed it expedient and proper to have some of his 
 friends with him, and was accordingly accompanied 
 
 1 Test, of J. Whitall, Foster, I. 247. 
 
 1 Testimony of Abraham Lower, Foster's Report, I. 416. 
 
 IV — 19 
 
218 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDEKS. 
 
 by John Comly, Eobert Moore, John Moore, John 
 Hunt, and others, some of whom had been at the 
 Southern Quarterly Meeting, and could give evi- 
 dence in the case. 1 The elders denied him the priv- 
 ilege of bringing any of his friends with him ; not 
 even those ministers and elders then in the city from 
 the country meeting, who had full as much right as 
 themselves to be present. One of the ten elders sug- 
 gested that they desired a private opportunity with 
 Elias Hicks, and added, that unless it was private 
 they would have none. Abraham Lower, a minister 
 of Green Street Meeting, thought their proposition 
 unreasonable, and remarked, that as Elias Hicks was 
 then performing family visits to the members of 
 Green Street Monthly Meeting, some of them, who 
 were present, thought themselves concerned in the 
 case; but he had no doubt that all of them, except the 
 ministers and elders, would withdraw if desired. 2 One 
 of the accusing elders replied, that unless all withdrew 
 but Elias and his companion, they would withdraw. 
 Elias objected to the proposition, called upon them 
 to bring forward their charges, said he was ready to 
 hear them, and justly complained that he had been 
 cruelly treated. One of his accusers stated that they 
 should take the charges for granted ; and Elias, having 
 understood the nature of them through some other 
 channel, declared they were false. The self-consti- 
 tuted committee of elders then withdrew, and soon 
 after, a deputation of them waited on two of the 
 elders of Green Street Meeting in order to dissuade 
 them from assisting Elias Hicks in the prosecution 
 
 1 Cockburn'c Review, p. 66. 
 
 2 Testimony of Abraham Lower, Foster's Report, I. 359, 416. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 219 
 
 of his visit; but they had the magnanimity to dis- 
 courage such disorderly interference. He accom- 
 plished his visit to nearly all the families of that 
 meeting, and then attended the Monthly Meeting, 
 where an indorsement of approbation and unity with 
 his religious labors was placed on his certificate, 
 which was done without a dissenting voice. 1 
 
 Eli as Hicks, though firm in his resolutions and 
 dignified in his deportment, was remarkable for the 
 tenderness of his feelings, and the humility of his 
 character. One of his accusers, Joseph Whitall, on 
 being cross-examined, admitted that Elias in one of 
 their interviews wept on account of the difference in 
 their views, and the sad consequences that might en- 
 sue. 2 And Halliday Jackson, in his testimony, states 
 that being at Baltimore Yearly Meeting in the year 
 1822, and having heard of the account that had been 
 circulated by Joseph "Whitall, he took an early op- 
 portunity to obtain an interview with Elias Hicks, 
 which was readily granted. On being informed of 
 those charges, Elias said he was surprised that his 
 friends in Philadelphia should be carried away with 
 such tales. " He gave me," says the witness, " such 
 explanations of the conversation that took place be- 
 tween him and Joseph "Whitall, as fully satisfied my 
 mind on the subject, and amounted to a denial of the 
 charges and the manner in which this conversation 
 had been represented." * * * * "We had a good 
 deal of friendly conversation together; finding the 
 openness and candor of the man, I was entirely sat- 
 isfied as to any impressions which the spreading o^ 
 
 1 Testimony of Abraham Lower, Foster's Report, I. 360. 
 9 Foster's Report, I. 246. 
 
220 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 ♦ 
 
 this report had had upon my mind. I made some 
 apologies to him for the freedom I had used with 
 him, being a young man to what he was ; but he ex- 
 pressed much satisfaction that I had taken that lib- 
 erty; and his esteem, I believe, for me, was rather 
 increased by it." 1 
 
 The following correspondence and certificates will 
 explain the nature of the charges then made against 
 Elias Hicks, and the refutation of them by himself 
 and his friends. 
 
 LETTER FROM THE TEN ELDERS TO ELIAS HICKS. 
 
 " To Elias Hicks. 
 
 "Friends in Philadelphia having for a consider- 
 able time past heard of thy holding and promulgating 
 doctrines different from, and repugnant to those held 
 by our religious Society, it was cause of uneasiness and 
 deep concern to them, as their sincere regard and en- 
 gagement for the promotion of the cause of truth made 
 it very desirable that all the members of our religious 
 society should move in true harmony under the lead- 
 ing and direction of our Blessed Redeemer: upon 
 being informed of thy sentiments expressed by Joseph 
 Whitall : that Jesus Christ was not the Son of God, 
 until after the baptism of John, and the descent of the 
 Holy Ghost, and that he was no more than a man; 
 that the same power that made Christ a Christian 
 must make us Christians; and that the same power 
 that saved him must save us; many Friends were 
 affected therewith, and some time afterwards, several 
 Friends being together in the city on subjects relating 
 to our religious society, they received an account from 
 
 1 Foster's Report, II. 40, 41. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDEKS. 221 
 
 Ezra Comfort, of some of thy expressions in the pub- 
 lic general meeting immediately succeeding the South- 
 ern Quarterly Meeting lately held in the State of Del- 
 aware, which was also confirmed by his companion, 
 Isaiah Bell: that Jesus Christ was the first man that 
 introduced the gospel dispensation ; the Jews being 
 under the outward and ceremonial law or dispensation, 
 it was necessary that there should be some outward 
 miracle, as the healing of the outward infirmities of 
 the flesh, and raising the outward dead bodies, in 
 order to introduce the gospel dispensation ; he had no 
 more power given him than man, for he was no more 
 than man ; he had nothing to do with the healing of 
 the soul, for that belongs to God only ; Elisha had 
 the same power to raise the dead ; that man being 
 obedient to the Spirit of God, in him could arrive at 
 as great or greater degree of righteousness than Jesus 
 Christ ; that Jesus Christ thought it not robbery to 
 be equal with God, neither do I think it robbery for 
 man to be equal with God ; then endeavoured to show 
 that by attending to that stone cut out of the moun- 
 tain without hands, or the seed in man, it would make 
 man equal with God, saying, for that stone in man 
 was the entire God. On hearing which, it appeared 
 to Friends a subject of such great importance and of 
 such deep interest to the welfare of our religious 
 society, as to require an extension of care, in order that 
 if any incorrect statement had been made it should 
 as soon as possible be rectified, or if true, thou might 
 be possessed of the painful concerns of Friends, and 
 their sense and judgment thereon. Two of the elders 
 accordingly waited on thee on the evening of the day 
 of thy arriving in the city, and although thou denied 
 the statement, yet thy declining to meet these two 
 
 19* IV — 2 H 
 
222 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 elders in company with those who made it, left the 
 minds of Friends withont relief: one of the elders 
 who had called on thee repeated his visit on the next 
 day but one, and again requested thee to see the two 
 elders and the Friends who made the above state- 
 ments, which thou again declined. The elders from 
 the different monthly meetings in the city were then 
 convened, and requested a private opportunity with 
 thee, which thou also refused, yet the next day con- 
 sented to meet them at a time and place of thy own 
 fixing ; but when assembled, a mixed company being 
 collected, the elders could not in this manner enter 
 into business which they considered of a nature not 
 to be investigated in any other way than in a select 
 private opportunity ; they therefore considered that 
 meeting a clear indication of thy continuing to decline 
 to meet the elders, as by them proposed. Under these 
 circumstances it appearing that thou art not willing 
 to hear and disprove the charges brought against thee, 
 we feel it a duty to declare that we cannot have reli- 
 gious unity with thy conduct, nor with the doctrines 
 thou art charged with promulgating. 
 
 "Signed, 12th month 19th, 1822. 
 
 Caleb Pierce, 
 Leonard Snowden, 
 Joseph Scattergood, 
 Saml. P. Griffeths, 
 T. Stewardson, 
 Edward Randolph, 
 Israel Maule, 
 Ellis Yarnell, 
 Richard Humphries, 
 Thomas Wistar." 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 223 
 ANSWER OF ELIAS HICKS. 
 
 "To Caleb Pierce, and other Friends. 
 
 "Having been charged by you of unsoundness 
 of principle and doctrine, founded on reports spread 
 among the people in an unfriendly manner, and con- 
 trary to the order of our discipline, by Joseph Whitall, 
 as stated in the letter from you, dated the 19th inst. ; 
 and as these charges are not literally true, being 
 founded on his own forced and improper construction 
 of my words, I deny them ; and as I do not consider 
 myself amenable to him, nor to any other for crimes 
 laid to my charge as being committed in the course 
 of the sittings of our last Yearly Meeting, as not any 
 of my fellow-members of that meeting discovered or 
 noticed any such things, which I presume to be the 
 case, as not an individual has mentioned any such 
 things to me, but contrary thereto many of our most 
 valuable Friends (who had heard some of those foul 
 reports first promulgated by an individual of our city) 
 acknowledged the great satisfaction they had with my 
 services and exercise in the course of that meeting, 
 and were fully convinced that all those reports were 
 false, and this view is fully confirmed by a certificate 
 granted me by the Monthly and Quarterly meetings 
 of which I am a member, in which they express their 
 full unity with me, and winch meetings were held a 
 considerable time after our Yearly Meeting, in the 
 course of which Joseph Whitall has presumed to 
 charge me with unsoundness of doctrine contrary to 
 the sense of the Yearly, Quarterly and Monthly meet- 
 ings, of which I am a member, and to whom only I 
 hold myself amenable for all conduct transacted within 
 their limits. The other charges against me made by 
 
224 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 Ezra Comfort, as expressed in your letter, are in the 
 general incorrect, as is proved by the annexed certifi- 
 cate ; and moreover, as Ezra Comfort has departed 
 from gospel order, in not mentioning his uneasiness 
 to me, when present with me, and when I could have 
 appealed to Friends of that meeting to have justified 
 me, therefore I consider Ezra Comfort to have acted 
 disorderly and contrary to discipline, and these are 
 the reasons which induced me to refuse a compli- 
 ance with your requisitions, as considering them 
 arbitrary and contrary to the established order of our 
 Society. Elias Hicks." 1 
 
 "Philadelphia, 12th month 21st, 1822. 
 
 "We, the undersigned, being occasionally in the 
 city of Philadelphia, where a letter was produced and 
 handed to us, signed by ten of the citizens, elders of 
 the Society of Friends, and directed to Elias Hicks, 
 after perusing and deliberately considering the charges 
 made therein against him, for holding and propagating 
 doctrines inconsistent with our religious testimonies, 
 and more especially those said by Ezra Comfort and 
 Isaiah Bell to be held forth at a meeting immediately 
 succeeding the late Southern Quarterly Meeting, and 
 we being members of the Southern Quarter, and present 
 at the said meeting, are free to state for the satisfaction 
 of the first-mentioned Friends and all others whom it 
 may concern, that we apprehend the charges exhibited 
 by the two Friends named are without substantial 
 foundation, and in order to give a clear view we think 
 it best and proper here to transcribe the said charges 
 exhibited, and our understanding of them severally, 
 
 1 Foster's Report, II. 492. Exhibit 81, produced by Thos. Evans. 
 
ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 225 
 
 viz. : ' That Jesus Christ was the first man that intro- 
 duced the gospel dispensation, the Jews being under 
 an outward ceremonial law or dispensation, it was 
 necessary there should be some outward miracles, as 
 healing the outward infirmities of the flesh, and rais- 
 ing the outward dead bodies, in order to introduce the 
 gospel dispensation;' this is substantially correct: — 
 ' That he had no more power given him than man, 
 for he was no more than man ; ' this sentence is incor- 
 rect, as also that he had nothing to do with healing 
 the soul, for that belonged to God only,' is likewise 
 incorrect ; — and the next sentence, ' That Elisha had 
 the same power to raise the dead,' should be trans- 
 posed thus to give his expression : ' by the same power 
 it was that Elisha raised the dead.' ' That man by 
 being obedient to the spirit of God in him, could 
 arrive at as great or greater degrees of righteousness 
 than Jesus Christ,' this is incorrect. 'That Jesus 
 Christ thought it not robbery to be equal with God,' 
 with annexing the other part of the paragraph men- 
 tioned by the holy apostle, would be correct. 'Neither 
 do I think it robbery for man to be equal with God,' 
 is incorrect. ' Then endeavouring to show that by 
 attending to that stone that was cut out of the moun- 
 tain without hands, or the seed in man, it would 
 make hkn equal with God,' is incorrect. The sen- 
 tence, 'for that stone in man was the entire God,' 
 should stand thus : ' That this stone, or seed in man 
 had all the attributes of the Divine nature that was in 
 Christ and God.' 
 
 "This statement and few necessary remarks we 
 make without comment, save only, that we were then 
 of opinion, and still are, that the sentiments and doc- 
 trines held forth by our said Friend Elias Hicks were 
 
 2H2 
 
226 ELIAS HICKS AND THE PHILA. ELDERS. 
 
 agreeable to the opinions and doctrines held forth by 
 George Fox, and our worthy predecessors of his time. 
 
 Robert Moore, 
 Joseph Turner, 
 Joseph G. Rowland." 1 
 
 This certificate was subsequently corroborated by 
 another, signed by twenty-two members of the South- 
 ern Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Nine of the elders wrote another letter to Elias 
 Hicks, dated Phila., 1st month 4th, 1823, expressing 
 their continued disapprobation of his doctrines, and 
 Jonathan Evans appended a few lines expressing his 
 concurrence with "their concern and care." 2 
 
 The conduct of Ezra Comfort and Isaiah Bell, in 
 relation to the charges against Elias Hicks, being 
 brought before the Monthly Meeting to which they 
 belonged, they were dealt with as the discipline re- 
 quires, and being unwilling to acknowledge their 
 error, were disowned. They appealed to Abington 
 Quarterly Meeting, and the judgment of the Monthly 
 Meeting was confirmed. They then appealed to the 
 Yearly Meeting, and were reinstated. 3 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 There is a remarkable analogy between the course pursued by 
 the elders in Philadelphia towards Elias Hicks, and that which 
 was subsequently pursued by orthodox ministers and elders in 
 New England towards Joseph John Gurney. When this distin- 
 guished English Friend visited the United States in the year 1837, 
 he brought with him full credentials from the Monthly and Quar- 
 
 1 Foster's Report, II. 492. Exhibit No. 82, produced by T. 
 Evans. 
 
 2 Cockburn's Review, 76 to 79. 8 Foster's Rep., I. 367. 
 
THE MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS. 227 
 
 terly meetings to which he belonged, and a clear certificate from 
 the London Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, expressing 
 their unity with him and his concern, and stating that he was a 
 minister in unity and well approved amongst them. While en- 
 gaged in his religious mission in New England, in the year 1838, 
 John Wilbur, a minister of the Society, charged him with having 
 published unsound doctrines in England, and not being satisfied 
 with his answer, proceeded both by oral and written communica- 
 tions to caution Friends against receiving or imbibing his senti- 
 ments. 
 
 The coursopursued by John Wilbur being considered disorderly, 
 he was dealt with as an offender against the discipline, and dis- 
 owned. A large majority of New England Yearly Meeting con- 
 curred in this measure, but a schism ensued, and the smaller 
 body, adhering to John Wilbur, established a separate Yearly 
 Meeting, which was subsequently associated in religious fellow- 
 ship with other bodies of the same class that became detached 
 from some of the Orthodox Yearly meetings to which the schism 
 extended. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS, 
 
 PHILADELPHIA. 
 
 One of the subjects introduced into the Meeting 
 for Sufferings of Philadelphia was a doctrinal con- 
 troversy, over the signatures of Paul and Amicus, 
 printed in a periodical paper at Wilmington, Dela- 
 ware. The doctrines of Friends being attacked by 
 Paul, were defended by Amicus in a very able man- 
 ner, as was generally thought ; and at the close of the 
 controversy, the essays on both sides were reprinted 
 in a book, which was patronized by a large number 
 of Friends. 
 
 In the summer or autumn of the year 1822, several 
 
228 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 
 
 numbers of the periodical, containing this controversy, 
 were produced in the Meeting for Sufferings, and 
 some of the members of that meeting expressed an 
 apprehension that the doctrines of Friends were not 
 correctly stated by Amicus. 1 Abraham Lower in- 
 formed the Friend, who wrote over the signature of 
 Amicus, that objections had been made to his essays, 
 and he promptly determined to relieve the members 
 of the Society from any anxiety on that head, by as- 
 suming the responsibility himself individually, and 
 exonerating the Society. A notice to this effect was 
 inserted in one of the numbers of the paper in which 
 the controversy was published. This notice was pre- 
 sented to Jonathan Evans, clerk of the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, who read it to the meeting. 2 
 
 It would seem that this declaration oughi to have 
 satisfied reasonable men, but some of the members of 
 the Meeting for Sufferings desired the appointment 
 of a committee to bring forward a suitable minute to 
 be inserted in the volume of essays about to be pub- 
 lished. 
 
 A committee was accordingly appointed, who pro- 
 duced a minute disavowing any connection with the 
 writing or publication of those essays. They also 
 brought forward in the First month, 1823, a paper 
 purporting to be "Extracts from the Writings of 
 Primitive Friends concerning the Divinity of our Lord 
 and Saviour Jesus Christ." 3 The minute thus pro- 
 duced was agreed to by the meeting, but the pub- 
 lisher of the book refused to insert it. The extracts, 
 
 1 Testimony of Joseph Whitall. Foster's Rep. I. 216. 
 
 2 Test, of A. Lower, Foster, I. 368. 
 
 3 Foster's Report, II. 414, 476, and Testimony of W. Evans, Vol. 
 II. p. 329. 
 
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS, PHILADELPHIA. 229 
 
 when read in the Meeting for Sufferings, were opposed 
 by some of the members, under an apprehension that 
 they might be used to abridge the right of private 
 judgment. 1 They were, moreover, in a very objec- 
 tionable form ; no references being given to show 
 whence they were taken, and no quotation-marks 
 affixed, except to the texts of Scripture included. It 
 has since been stated that the extracts were garbled, 
 some of them being parts of sentences, with no clew to 
 guide the reader in searching for the context. Not- 
 withstanding the objections urged against the docu- 
 ment, it was passed, and a large edition ordered to be 
 printed. It was printed but not distributed, as had 
 been expected. 
 
 When the Yearly Meeting came on, in the Spring 
 of 1823, the proceedings of the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings were read as usual ; but what was the surprise 
 of the members to find the whole of those extracts 
 copied into the minutes and read in the Yearly 
 Meeting. 
 
 The design of the Clerk of the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings appeared to be, to obtain for them the sanc- 
 tion of the Yearly Meeting without further examina- 
 tion, and thus have them established as a standard of 
 doctrines. 
 
 The reading of them produced a great excitement 
 in the Yearly Meeting, and a substantial Friend from 
 the country exclaimed, "Who hath required this at 
 your hands?" 2 Very great dissatisfaction was ex- 
 pressed by a large number of Friends, who desired 
 that the extracts should be expunged, but the clerk 
 objected that it would deface the minutes, and it was 
 
 1 Test, of A. Lower. Foster, I. 368, 369, 463. 
 
 2 Testimony of Halliday Jackson, Foster, II. 102. 
 20 
 
230 PROCEEDINGS OF T£E 
 
 finally agreed that the pamphlet should not be 
 published. 1 
 
 The document thus suppressed by order of the 
 Yearly Meeting, was popularly called " the creed" 
 
 It had, for many years, been the practice of some 
 of the Quarterly meetings most distant from the city 
 of Philadelphia, to appoint for their representatives 
 in the Meeting for Sufferings, persons living in or 
 near the city, for the sake of convenience in attend- 
 ing its sittings. The Southern Quarterly Meeting, 
 situated in Delaware and the Eastern shore of Mary- 
 land, had been for some years represented by Abra- 
 ham Lower, Caleb Pierce, Isaac Lloyd, and Joseph 
 Turner. In the 5th month, 1826, Abraham Lower 
 attended that Quarterly Meeting and proposed that, 
 as he had been one of their representatives for ten 
 or twelve years, they should make a new nomination. 
 Joseph Turner also requested to be released. The 
 Quarterly Meeting agreed to the proposal, concluded 
 to release all their representatives, and appointed a 
 committee to bring forward the names of suitable 
 persons to represent them in the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings. They nominated for that service Abraham 
 Lower, Dr. Joseph Parrish, Dr. John Wilson Moore 
 of Philadelphia, and Halliday Jackson of Darby. 
 The last three were known to be thoroughly opposed 
 to the proceedings of the elders in Philadelphia, and 
 when they attended the Meeting for Sufferings, that 
 body refused to acknowledge their appointment. 
 Being denied the right to sit in the meeting, they 
 were under the necessity of withdrawing. 
 
 This action of the Meeting for Sufferings was un- 
 
 1 Testimony of Abraham Lower, Foster, I. 368. 
 
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS, PHILADELPHIA. 231 
 
 prececlented in the Society, and was regarded by 
 many as a confirmation of the suspicion they had for 
 some years entertained, that there was in that meet- 
 ing a strong party determined to govern without 
 regard to the wishes of their constituents. 1 
 
 One of the most remarkable features of this case 
 was, that Caleb Pierce and Isaac Lloyd, two of the 
 representatives formerly appointed by the Southern 
 Quarter, presented to the Meeting for Sufferings a re- 
 monstrance against their being released from that 
 station. 2 A committee was thereupon appointed to 
 attend the Southern Quarterly Meeting and confer 
 with it in relation to the appointment of its repre- 
 sentatives. At a subsequent meeting, the committee 
 reported attention to the service, and stated that 
 "the Quarterly Meeting declined appointing a com- 
 mittee or in any way explaining their views on the 
 subject." 3 
 
 The positions taken by the Meeting for Sufferings 
 and its committee, for rejecting the three represen- 
 tatives recently appointed, were as follows: — 
 
 1st. That the entire revision of its representation 
 by a Quarterly meeting was unprecedented. 
 
 2d. That no vacancy had occurred ; for the only 
 cases that constitute a vacancy, according to the 
 discipline, are death, resignation, or neglect of at- 
 tendance. 
 
 3d. That no change in the rule of the Society 
 could be made, but by the Yearly Meeting, and that, 
 two years before, a proposal to consider the expe- 
 diency of all appointments being for a limited time, 
 was regularly brought up from one of the Quarters, 
 
 1 Testimony of A. Lower, Foster, I. 370. 2 Ibid. 
 
 3 Extracts from Minutes of M. for Suf., Foster, II. p. 477. 
 
232 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 
 
 and on consideration the Yearly Meeting decided 
 that way did not open to make the proposed change." 1 
 
 In reply to these allegations, the following facts and 
 considerations are submitted. 
 
 1st. For some years after the institution of the 
 Meeting for Sufferings, the Yearly Meeting adopted, 
 each year, a minute stating in substance ; that it was 
 continued, as then constituted, "reserving to each 
 Quarterly Meeting the right of changing any of the 
 members in the places where they were respectively 
 nominated." Or, as expressed in one of the minutes, 
 " reserving to the Quarterly meetings the right of 
 changing their members when they think proper." 2 
 In 1768, the following minute was adopted by the 
 Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia : "The proceedings 
 of the Meeting for Sufferings for the year past being 
 read and approved, it is agreed to continue that 
 meeting, agreeable to former minutes, until this meet- 
 ing may think it necessary to order the contrary."* 
 
 As the Yearly Meeting has never ordered the con- 
 trary, the conclusion is unquestionable that the Meet- 
 ing for Sufferings has been continued according to 
 former minutes, securing the rights of the Quarterly 
 meetings to change their representatives when they 
 think proper. 
 
 The institution of the Meeting for Sufferings took 
 place in the year 1T56 ; and Buck's Quarterly Meet- 
 ing appointed that year four representatives. The 
 next year, it continued two of these in that station, 
 and appointed two others as representatives "for the 
 
 1 Exhibit No. 47, Foster's Rep. II. 477. 
 
 2 Minutes of Phila. Y. M., 1757 to 1762 inclusive. 
 
 3 See Chapter X. on Discipline. 
 
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS, PHILADELPHIA. 233 
 
 ensuing year." It is most probable that many such 
 cases might be found on the records of the Quarterly 
 meetings; but here is at least one precedent, show- 
 ing that the right of changing the representatives of 
 the Quarters was exercised. 
 
 It appears to have been the general practice of the 
 Quarterly meetings to continue their representatives 
 in the Meeting for Sufferings until they resigned or 
 were removed by death, but they never relinquished 
 the right to release them and appoint others ; nor 
 does this right appear to have been called in question 
 until the Southern Quarter undertook to release 
 those who did not truly represent its sentiments. 1 
 
 2d. In reply to the second position, that there was 
 no vacancy, it may be stated, that one of the former 
 members, Joseph Turner, did resign, and Abraham 
 Lower, another, requested, as he had served for ten 
 or twelve years, that there might be a new nomina- 
 tion. 
 
 3d. And as to the third position, which relates to 
 a change of discipline, it is obvious that no alteration 
 was needed to enable the Quarterly meetings to 
 change their representatives, for this right was 
 guaranteed to them by the Yearly Meeting and had 
 never been revoked. The proposition alluded to, 
 which contemplated making all appointments for a 
 limited time, and which the Yearly Meeting did not 
 adopt, has no bearing on the question ; for when the 
 Meeting for Sufferings was first instituted, the mem- 
 bers were not required by discipline to be appointed 
 for a limited time, and yet the Quarterly meetings 
 had the right to remove them without assigning any 
 reason. 
 
 1 Testimony of Halliday Jackson, Foster's Rep. II. 97 to 101. 
 20* 2 1 
 
234 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 
 
 The attempt of the Meeting for Sufferings to 
 impose upon the Society the declaration of faith 
 inserted in its minutes and read in the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, had awakened in the minds of many Friends a 
 painful distrust of its ulterior purposes ; and when it 
 subsequently took the bold stand of denying to a 
 Quarterly Meeting the right to change its represen- 
 tatives, there were thousands who felt that their 
 religious liberty was in danger. 
 
 The growing importance of that meeting, and the 
 encroachments that might be apprehended from it, 
 had long been seen by some sagacious minds ; and 
 one of its members, in the latter part of the last cen- 
 tury, had left on record a warning of the danger. 
 David Cooper, of Woodbury Monthly Meeting, who 
 died in 1795, at the age of 71 years, left with his 
 children the following remarks on the Meeting for 
 Sufferings. 
 
 " I am free to make a few remarks on this meet- 
 ing, which you, my dear children, may live to see 
 realized, if well founded. It is now about twenty- 
 five years since its establishment, and it consisted of 
 twelve members appointed by the Yearly Meeting, 
 and four by each Quarter, making thirty-six, — two 
 new Quarterly meetings having been added since, 
 makes the standing number forty-four. I have ob- 
 served the increasing importance of this meeting, 
 which, though so called, is only a standing committee 
 of the Yearly Meeting. It is a truth that ought not 
 to be lost sight of, that whenever a subordinate body 
 becomes too important either from its members 
 [numbers ?] or the weight of its members, it will 
 naturally engross a power and consequence beyond 
 the limits intended for it. It will thus grow more 
 
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS, PHILADELPHIA. 235 
 
 or less out of the reach of the body that controls it; — 
 the superior meeting ought strenuously to maintain 
 its standing. 
 
 " If I am not mistaken, this has already appeared 
 to be too much the case with that meeting, and I 
 fear it will increase with time. Its name implies its 
 business, a meeting for sufferings, but many other 
 matters of great importance to the Society are con- 
 sidered and debated there ; even principles of faith 
 have been frequently the subjects of discussion." 1 
 
 After these judicious remarks were written, other 
 Quarterly meetings were established, and thus the 
 Meeting for Sufferings was further increased in num- 
 bers. In the year 1826 it consisted of fifty-six mem- 
 bers, of whom all were of the class called Orthodox, 
 except ten or twelve. 2 As it was well known that 
 not more than one-third of the members of that 
 Yearly Meeting were Orthodox, it is obvious that 
 the sentiments of the body were not represented in 
 the Meeting for Sufferings, hence it became an in- 
 tolerable grievance when this "standing committee" 
 denied to the Quarterly meetings their ancient right 
 to change their representatives, and thus virtually 
 declared itself independent of its constituents. 
 
 It was composed of some of the most influential 
 men in the Society, a large proportion of them re- 
 siding in or near the city ; and such was their power 
 in the Yearly Meeting, that no change of discipline, 
 limiting or defining the tenure of their office, could 
 be effected. They had attained a position from 
 which it appeared that nothing short of a revolution 
 in the Society could dislodge them. 
 
 1 The Friend or Advocate of Truth, Vol. III. No. 13. 
 
 2 Testimony of Joseph Whitall, Foster's Rep. I. 253. 
 
236 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 The Southern Quarterly Meeting forwarded to the 
 Yearly Meeting a report concerning the rejection of 
 its representatives ; but there was little hope of their 
 grievances being redressed by a body in which party 
 spirit had gained the ascendancy, and counteracted 
 the sweet influences of brotherly love. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 Oxe of the chief obstructions to harmonious action 
 in the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia and most of 
 its branches, was the assumption by a party, that the 
 weight was all on their side; and although it was 
 known that they were greatly in the minority, the 
 clerk of the Yearly Meeting, Samuel Bettle, who was 
 one of the party, determined to act upon that principle. 
 He regarded all those who gave their voices against 
 the adoption of the declaration of faith presented by 
 the Meeting for Sufferings, as having no weiglit at all, 
 thus virtually disfranchising them, without a shadow 
 of authority. Being questioned on this matter. Sam- 
 uel Bettle testified as follows: "I never considered 
 them entitled to any weight or influence at all. I 
 mean the same persons who had expressed them- 
 selves in relation to those extracts, and in opposition 
 to them in the Yearly Meeting of 1823, and whose 
 objections I have quoted." 1 
 
 Some of those who objected to that declaration of 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. I. p. 82. 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 237 
 
 faith, did so because they were opposed to all creeds; 
 others thought the extracts from the writings of early 
 Friends were garbled; and among those who opposed 
 its adoption were many whose religious experience 
 and uprightness of conduct entitled them to the 
 highest respect. The same principle by which these 
 members were disfranchised in the Yearly Meeting 
 was, of course, applied in the subordinate meetings 
 to them, and to all who did not coincide with, that 
 party which assumed to be "the meeting." It was 
 an important point with the party which took the 
 name of Orthodox, to secure for their side, the clerks, 
 overseers, trustees, and a majority of the important 
 committees. In this endeavor they were so success- 
 ful, that in most of the meetings in Philadelphia 
 Quarter they obtained the ascendancy. 1 
 
 In that city, the two parties were found nearly equal 
 when they came to divide ; but of the five Monthly 
 meetings, Green Street alone was able to withstand 
 the influence of that powerful combination which 
 controlled the Meeting for Sufferings and all the Se- 
 lect meetings of the city. In the other Quarterly 
 meetings, ten in number, the Orthodox party were 
 in the minority, and in all except two (Burlington 
 and Hadclonfield) it was a very small minority. In 
 the whole Yearly Meeting they comprised less than 
 one third of the members. 2 
 
 They had, however, very able leaders, and in point 
 of wealth and social position, many of them stood 
 pre-eminent in the Society. There were among 
 them men and women of sincere piety, who had be- 
 
 1 Cockburn's Review, pp. 91, 92. 
 
 2 Foster's Report, Exhibit T. Vol. II. p. 461. 
 
 212 
 
238 DISTUKBED MEETINGS. 
 
 come persuaded that heresy was abroad and must be 
 put down. For this purpose they were induced to 
 resort to measures that, in less exciting times, they 
 would have abhorred. Among them there was also 
 a large class who had never passed through the re- 
 fining process of Spiritual baptism; but being re- 
 spected for their wealth, intelligence, and orderly 
 deportment, they were appointed on committees, or 
 employed as clerks, until they conceived that they 
 were qualified for service in the church, and took 
 an active part in its discipline, without the subjec- 
 tion of their wills to the divine government. 
 
 This latter class was indeed found in both parties, 
 and is the natural result of traditional religion in all 
 societies. 
 
 The religious engagement of Elias Hicks in visiting 
 the families of Green Street Monthly Meeting in the 
 Twelfth month, 1822, and the indorsement of unity 
 and approbation placed on his certificate by that meet- 
 ing, have been noticed in a preceding chapter. 
 
 Leonard Snowclen, an elder of that meeting, was 
 present when the indorsement was adopted, and on 
 some alteration being proposed in it, remarked that 
 "he thought it would do." After thus giving his 
 assent to the action of the meeting, he joined with 
 other elders in the city in signing a paper which 
 impeached the gospel ministry of Elias Hicks, there- 
 by counteracting and arraigning the judgment of his 
 Monthly Meeting. In consequence of this and other 
 acts of opposition to the meeting, he was taken un- 
 der its care through the medium of the overseers, 
 and after continued but unavailing efforts to effect a 
 reconciliation, he was released from the station of 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 239 
 
 elder, but his rights and privileges as a member were 
 not impaired. 1 
 
 While his case was under the care of the Monthly 
 Meeting, in the 4th month, 1823, the Preparative 
 Meeting of Ministers and Elders belonging to Green 
 Street Monthly Meeting took up the subject, and re- 
 quested the aid of the Quarterly Meeting of Ministers 
 and Elders in a case of difficulty. 
 
 This interference with the business of a Meeting- 
 for Discipline by the Select meeting, was a breach 
 of order, and is expressly prohibited by a rule of dis- 
 cipline. For although the Select meetings are author- 
 ized to extend care to a minister or an elder, who, 
 through " negligence, unfaithfulness, or otherwise 
 has lost his or her service in that station," yet it is 
 only allowable in such cases as are " not under the 
 care of a Meeting for Discipline on that account." 
 
 This point has been more fully elucidated in a sec- 
 tion of Chapter X. relating to ministers and elders. 
 
 It is obvious that an elder must have lost his use- 
 fulness or service in that station, when he has ceased 
 to be in unity with the Monthly Meeting; and if the 
 position were admitted that Monthly meetings cannot 
 release elders from service in such cases, it would go 
 far towards establishing in the Society an irrespon- 
 sible oligarchy. 
 
 The Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders in 
 Philadelphia in the 8th month, 1823, acted upon the 
 application from the Select Preparative Meeting of 
 Green Street, and appointed a committee, to extend 
 aid and advice. This committee, after having charge 
 of the case more than a year, reported that Green 
 
 1 Statement of Facts by Gn. St Mo. Mg., Foster's Eeport, II. 445, 
 and Test, of A. Lower, I. 362. 
 
240 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 Street Monthly Meeting had interfered, and in a sum- 
 mary manner acted in relation to the Friend [Leo- 
 nard Snowden] in such a way " that they consider 
 him as not retaining his place in the Preparative 
 Meeting of ministers and elders." 1 
 
 The Quarterly Meeting of Ministers and Elders, on 
 receiving this report, referred the subject to the Quar- 
 terly Meeting for Discipline, and at the same time 
 Leonard Snowden addressed to the last-named meet- 
 ing a remonstrance, which he called an appeal. 
 
 In this appeal he states that " his religious rights 
 had been invaded" by Green Street Monthly Meet- 
 ing, and that, "being virtually placed in the situation 
 of a disowned person," he did not feel himself at 
 liberty to attend meetings for discipline, or to exer- 
 cise the privileges of a member. 2 These allegations 
 were unfounded, as it was well known that he had 
 not been disowned, nor had his religious rights been 
 invaded. 
 
 The station of an elder is not a ri°dit that can 
 be claimed by any member, however worthy he may 
 be to occupy it, but is regarded as a service assigned 
 by the Monthly Meeting, and it would be hard indeed 
 if the same meeting cannot relieve from that service 
 those whom it has appointed. We know that the 
 right to remove elders was claimed and exercised by 
 Monthly meetings at the time the eldership was first 
 instituted in Penns3dvania. 3 
 
 In the Book of Discipline there is no provision for 
 appeals from an inferior to a superior meeting, ex- 
 cept in cases of disownment, and an appeal from one 
 
 1 Foster's Report, II. 481. 2 Ibid. II. 482, 
 
 8 See Chapter X., section Ministers and Elders. 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 241 
 
 who had been an elder, to be reinstated in that sta- 
 tion, was believed to be without authority or prece- 
 dent in the Society. The introduction of Leonard 
 Snowden's case into the Quarterly Meeting for Disci- 
 pline in the Eleventh month, 1824, produced much 
 discussion and some excitement. The orthodox elders 
 were very active and urgent for it to be taken up; 
 but being opposed by many, it was postponed. 1 At 
 a subsequent Quarterly Meeting the following minute 
 from Green Street Monthly Meeting was received : — 
 
 "At a Monthly Meeting of Friends held at Green 
 Street, Philadelphia, the 20th of First month, 1825. 
 
 "This meeting being informed by our representa- 
 tives to our last Quarterly Meeting, that Leonard 
 Snowden had presented a remonstrance, appealing 
 against the proceedings of Green Street Monthly 
 Meeting — we inform the Quarterly Meeting that the 
 said paper was presented without acquainting this 
 meeting, and that Leonard Snowden is not deprived 
 of any of his rights as a member of our religious 
 society. 
 
 "The foregoing is directed to be included in the 
 extracts to be furnished to the Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 "Extracted from the minutes. Joseph Warner, 
 Clerk." 
 
 The Quarterly Meeting not being able to come to 
 any decision in this case, postponed it from time to 
 time, until the Fifth month, 1826, when it was con- 
 cluded to ask the advice of the Yearly Meeting in 
 regard to it as " a case of difficulty." 
 
 In the 8th month of the same year two women 
 Friends, who had manifested " open and continued 
 
 1 Testimony of A. Lower, Foster, I. 362. 
 IV — 21 
 
242 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 opposition," were released from the eldership lyy Green 
 Street Monthly Meeting, on the ground, that their ser- 
 vices as elders had ceased. In a document issued by 
 the Monthly Meeting, it is stated that they were re- 
 leased from that service on the authority of the fol- 
 lowing discipline: — 
 
 "1. That part of the third query just cited, which 
 requires that ministers and elders he 'in unity one 
 with another, and with the meeting they belong to.' 
 Page 96. 
 
 "2. That part of our discipline respecting elders, 
 which directs that Monthly meetings take care ' that 
 the Friends chosen for that service be prudent solid 
 Friends, and that they do carefully discharge the trust 
 contided to them.' Page 63. Both these injunctions 
 of the discipline obvious!} 7 make it obligatory on 
 Monthly meetings to have such elders only as are in 
 unity with them, and also to have none that are not 
 qualified for the station, or that do not ' carefully dis- 
 charge the trust confided to them.' 
 
 "3. That part of our discipline which directs what 
 course shall be pursued in meetings of ministers and 
 elders in reference to the release of a member of those 
 meetings who may 'be thought by negligence, un- 
 faithfulness, or otherwise, to have lost his or her ser- 
 vice in that station, so as to become the subject of 
 uneasiness and burdensome,' — yet manifestly giving 
 an antecedent and paramount right and authority to 
 'monthly meetings to take such individuals under care, 
 in the words following, viz. : 'yet not so as to be under 
 the care of a meeting of discipline on that account, or for 
 misconduct.' The words, 'that account,' manifestly 
 referring to loss of service, by negligence, unfaithful- 
 ness, or otherwise." Page 68. 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 243 
 
 The two women Friends who had been released 
 from the eldership, offered to the Quarterly Meeting 
 of Philadelphia a written communication, stating in 
 general terms that they were aggrieved by the pro- 
 ceedings of Green Street Monthly Meeting, without 
 specifying in what respects they considered themselves 
 aggrieved. It seems they regarded the eldership a 
 desirable office, but it is obvious that no person worthy 
 of it would consent to hold it in opposition to the will 
 of the meeting, unless influenced by others, in order 
 to promote the purposes of a party. 
 
 In the Quarterly Meeting, a strong effort was made 
 to have this considered as an appeal case, but this 
 measure was overruled. The representatives and other 
 members of Green Street Monthly Meeting attempted 
 to explain the nature of the grievance, but the opposite 
 party, who must have known what it was, would not 
 allow it, on the plea that the Quarterly Meeting not 
 being officially informed, should appoint a committee 
 to hear the complainants. A committee being accord- 
 ingly appointed, it undertook to transform the memo- 
 rial of the rejected elders into an appeal, and called on 
 the Monthly Meeting to produce the minutes of its 
 proceedings. The Monthly Meeting, considering that 
 the Quarterly Meeting had recently referred a similar 
 case to the Yearly Meeting for its advice, which had 
 not yet been given ; and believing that the committee 
 were transcending their authority, declined to comply 
 with the request, and refused to nominate any com- 
 mittee of their own on the case. 
 
 The Quarterly Meeting's committee, however, per- 
 sisted in their determination to make it an appeal 
 case, and reported as their judgment that the proceed- 
 ings of Green Street Monthly Meeting in relation to 
 
244 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 the two women Friends should be annulled. As they 
 did not mention in their report what it was that Green 
 Street Monthly Meeting had clone, the representatives 
 and some of the members of that meeting attempted 
 to explain that it was an appeal for the office of an elder, 
 and that these two Friends had merely been released 
 from that station. They were told that "the mem- 
 bers of Green Street Meeting could not be heard," 
 and the clerk, notwithstanding their remonstrances, 
 recorded a minute on the Quarterly Meeting books 
 adopting the judgment of the committee. 
 
 In the 11th month, 1826, at tlie Quarterly Meeting 
 of Philadelphia a proposition originated in the women's 
 meeting to visit the Monthly meetings; no specific, 
 object being stated, it was brought into the men's 
 meeting under a profession of religious concern. The 
 Quarterly Meeting had, for years, been divided in 
 sentiment, and was frequently convulsed with the 
 efforts of contending parties. It was, therefore, in no 
 condition to appoint a committee that would promote 
 harmony in the body. The proposition, while under 
 consideration in the men's meeting, met with such 
 decided opposition that the clerk declared he could 
 not conscientiously receive names for it. After a con- 
 test of several hours, the meeting adjourned till the 
 next day, and, during the interval, the clerk appears 
 to have been relieved of his scruples, for when the 
 meeting again convened, he complied without hesita- 
 tion with the wishes of the Orthodox party; in total 
 disregard of the judgment expressed by a large part 
 of tlie members. 2 
 
 "When the committee met to ascertain the object in 
 
 1 Statement of Facts, Foster's Rep., II. 445 to 451, 
 
 2 Ibid., and Cockburn's Review, p. 125. 
 
DI3TUKBED MEETINGS 245 
 
 view, two of the members, not being considered ortho- 
 dox, were treated with great indifference, and when the 
 rest were called together to agree upon a report, these 
 two did not receive notification. At the next Quar- 
 terly Meeting, held in the 2d mo. 1827, the committee 
 reported attention to their appointment, and were 
 continued, except the two obnoxious members, whose 
 places were supplied from the ranks of the orthodox. 1 
 Although the purpose for which this committee was 
 appointed did not clearly appear, subsequent develop- 
 ments showed, as will hereafter be related, that the 
 very existence of Green Street Monthly Meeting was 
 in peril. 
 
 While these events were in progress, the meetings 
 for worship in the city of Philadelphia were frequently 
 scenes of great disorder and excitement by reason of 
 the open opposition made by some of the elders and 
 others of the Orthodox party to the discourses of those 
 ministers that they deemed heretical in doctrine. 2 
 In thus publicly opposing ministers from other Yearly 
 meetings, who' came among them with proper creden- 
 tials, they violated a rule of discipline, and impaired 
 the harmony of the Society. Among the instances 
 of disorder arising from this cause, the most noted 
 was the opposition to Elias Hicks at Pine Street Meet- 
 ing, in the 12th month, 1826. A part of his discourse 
 which gave offence on that occasion, together with 
 the strictures of Jonathan Evans and Isaac Lloyd, 
 have been given in a preceding chapter. The doc- 
 trines which Elias Hicks then delivered have been 
 
 1 Cockburn's Review, p. 126. 
 
 2 Test, of H. Jackson, Foster's Rep., II. 37, 38, 43. 
 21* IV — 2 K 
 
246 DISTUKBED MEETINGS. 
 
 shown to be consistent with those of the early Friends, 
 and with the Scriptures. 1 
 
 In the afternoon of the same day he attended 
 Friends' meeting in the Western district [12th Street], 
 where there was a very lar^e con ore nation, as indeed 
 there always was where he attended in those day-. 
 Although the house was excessively crowded, and 
 many were standing, the meeting was solemn and 
 quiet while he was engaged in ministry. As soon as 
 he sat down, an orthodox elder of that meeting arose 
 and expressed disapprobation of the doctrines de- 
 livered, which caused great excitement and commo- 
 tion, especially among the younger part of the audi- 
 ence. Elias endeavored to allay the excitement, 
 saying mildly to the people, "Hear what the Friend 
 has to say." When quiet was restored, Willet Hicks, 
 of ISTew York, delivered a short, impressive discourse, 
 and the meeting closed without further disturbance. 2 
 
 The doctrines delivered at these two meetings, 
 and the conduct of the audiences, were made the 
 ground of a complaint against Elias Picks, and the 
 Monthly meetings held at Pine Street and Twelfth 
 Street sent a deputation to Jericho Monthly Meeting, 
 Long Island, where that venerable minister resided. 
 The two Orthodox Friends laid their documents on 
 the table, and were present while Elias Hicks re- 
 turned a certificate of concurrence that had been 
 granted him at a former meeting, together with sev- 
 eral indorsements of unity and approbation received 
 from meetings where he had been laboring in the 
 ministry. He also opened, at that time, a prospect 
 of a religious visit to the families of Friends of the 
 
 1 See Chap. Till., Section 4. 
 
 2 Test, of II. Jackson, Foster, II. 42, 80, 81. 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 247 
 
 two Monthly meetings of "Westbury and Jericho, 
 which was cordially approved by the meeting, and 
 all the business that came before it was transacted in 
 harmony. The communications from Philadelphia 
 were referred to a committee without being read, 
 and at the next Monthly Meeting a report was made 
 in favor of reading them, which was done ; but they 
 were deemed unworthy of further notice, and no 
 action of any kind was taken on them. 1 
 
 At Concord Quarterly Meeting, held at Darby in 
 the Eleventh month, 1826, Elias Hicks was in attend- 
 ance, also Nicholas Brown from Canada, Townsend 
 Hawkhurst from Long Island, and Elizabeth Robson 
 and Ann Jones from England. On the day preced- 
 ing the Quarterly Meeting for discipline, a meeting 
 of ministers and elders was held, in which Elias 
 Hicks and Nicholas Brown, as well as some other 
 Friends, were eno-a^ed in the ministry. 
 
 During the sitting of the Quarterly Meeting, Eliz- 
 abeth Robson and Ann Jones asked permission to 
 visit the menis meeting, and were admitted. They 
 both delivered long communications, and that of 
 Ann Jones was particularly offensive to a large part 
 of the meeting. At the close of the sitting, the 
 elders of the men's Quarterly Meeting were requested 
 to convene in the evening, which they did, and the 
 subject of Ann Jones' communication was taken 
 into consideration. There were fourteen present, all 
 of whom, except one, expressed dissatisfaction with 
 the discourse, and were in favor of seeking an 
 interview with her. 
 
 It being found, on inquiry, that she had gone to 
 
 1 Letters of Elias Hicks, p. 199. 
 
248 DISTUEBED MEETINGS. 
 
 Philadelphia, the elders of Darby Monthly Meeting 
 concluded to address a letter to her. It is couched 
 in courteous language, and describes her discourse as 
 follows : 
 
 "As near as we can recollect, after stating that 
 thou had brought nothing with thee, and did not 
 know what thou might have to communicate, thou 
 mentioned being oppressed with a sense of the infi- 
 delity that was spreading far and wide, and that thou 
 had heard in that house, things that had pierced thee 
 to thy very soul; — that thou had heard the Saviour 
 of the world, the Wonderful Counsellor, the Mighty 
 God, the Everlasting Father and Prince of Peace, 
 lowered down to a mere man, and that sacrifice de- 
 nied which he offered without the gates of Jeru- 
 salem. That the Son of God, and the blood of the 
 everlasting covenant, was trodden underfoot, and 
 counted an unholy thing. That these diabolical 
 doctrines had their origin in a proud Luciferian 
 spirit, and was a sin that ought to be punished by the 
 Judges; and that if the elders, on this extensive con- 
 tinent, had kept their places, they would have been 
 able to put a stop to these infidel doctrines that were 
 spreading far and wide among us, — adding that it 
 was not the individuals, but the spirit thou bore tes- 
 testimony against. This, we think, is near the sub- 
 stance of a considerable part of thy communication. 
 
 " Our discipline in this country points out an or- 
 der to be observed, which ought to be imperative, 
 especially on those who are travelling in truth's ser- 
 vice. Although thou mentioned no names, we think 
 thou made some personal allusion by referring to 
 something thou had heard in that house, perhaps the 
 day previous. If anything there had been delivered 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 249 
 
 that gave thee such uneasiness, it would have been 
 more consistent with gospel order to have sought a 
 private opportunity with the individuals, than to 
 have brought such a railing accusation against them 
 in a large assembly, very few of whom were present 
 the day before, and therefore could not tell to what 
 thou wast alluding. And as those whom we suppose 
 thou wast implicating, by alluding to something 
 thou had heard in that house, were ministers in hi^h 
 estimation with their friends at home, and travelling 
 on a religious account with the unity of their respec- 
 tive meetings equally with thyself — they were also 
 with thyself equally subject to the care of elders 
 wherever they gave cause of uneasiness. Thy con- 
 duct in this respect we must protest against, as in- 
 consistent with gospel order, unbecoming a minister 
 of the gospel towards their fellow-laborers (even 
 supposing thou had apprehended some unsoundness 
 of doctrine), and calculated to sow discord among 
 brethren, and produce disorder in the church. 
 
 " But we were all present at the meeting of minis- 
 ters and elders the day previous, and heard what was 
 delivered, and are fully satisfied in our own minds, 
 that thy charges were not correct. The character 
 and mission of the Messiah was exalted, and held up 
 to view as our true pattern, instead of being brought 
 down to the level of a mere man, — the sacrifice of 
 our sinful affections on the cross clearly set forth as 
 the only means of reconciliation with God, and the 
 life of Christ in the soul of man, as the alone atoning 
 blood that can effectually wash away our sins. And 
 as George Fox testifies, "there are none know Christ 
 nor his sufferings, but by the Spirit of God within," 
 so we believe propitiation to be an experimental 
 
 2K2 
 
250 DISTURBED MEETINGS. 
 
 work in the soul of man, and fully consistent with a 
 right understanding of the Scriptures, and the doc- 
 trines taught by our early Friends generally." * * * 
 
 The letter, after stating that her charges of infidel- 
 it}' were nowise applicable to the state of their Quar- 
 terly Meeting, recommends to her a close attention 
 to the divine gift, which would give her a clear sight 
 of the true state of the church, and make her instru- 
 mental in healing the breaches already made. It 
 was signed by John Hunt, Edward Garrigues, John 
 H. Bunting, and Hallida}- Jackson. 1 
 
 "I think it was the next First-day, if I am not 
 mistaken," continues Halliday Jackson in his testi- 
 mony, "after she had received this letter, she with 
 her husband and several others came out to Darby 
 Meeting, and as if she thought she had not done 
 her business well before, poured out another flood of 
 declamation and crimination upon us, stating that 
 she believed we had been led astray by wicked and 
 designing men, — that she had preached the gospel to 
 the fishermen, the sailors and the miners, in her own 
 country — men that we would disdain, as she said, to 
 set with the dogs of our flocks; and they would even 
 blush at our conduct. And among many other 
 things, I think she charged us with denying or un- 
 dervaluing the Scriptures; and that the heathen who 
 never had the Scriptures would go into the kingdom 
 of heaven before us, or something to this amount, — 
 and I believe nearly the words that I have repeated 
 she did express." After this second attack upon the 
 Friends at Darby, she was visited by Halliday Jack- 
 son and another elder, at her lodgings in Philadel- 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Exhibit S., Vol. II. p. 400. 
 
DISTURBED MEETINGS. 251 
 
 phia. She acknowledged the receipt of their letter, 
 and did not call in question the statement it con- 
 tained, but gave them no satisfaction. 1 
 
 The same witness, alluding particularly to Ann 
 Jones and Anna Braithwaite, expressed the follow- 
 ing sentiments : " I believe that the visit of those 
 English women, and the part they had taken gen- 
 erally in the course of their visit to this country, 
 greatly tended to accelerate, and finally to produce 
 the separation that has taken place, not only in the 
 Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia, but also in several 
 of the other Yearly meetings on the continent of 
 America." 2 
 
 At a public meeting for worship in New York, 
 held 6th month 1st, 1826, some of the English Friends 
 were in attendance. A stenographer who was pres- 
 ent, has given, in a note to one of the sermons then 
 delivered, the following account of a deeply interest- 
 ing scene that took place. 
 
 " As the circumstances of this meeting were pecu- 
 liar, and have been variously represented, it becomes 
 the duty of the stenographer to give a statement of 
 facts as they appeared to him at the time. 
 
 "At an early period of the meeting Mrs. Eobson 
 rose, and continued to speak for more than an hour. 
 She was very soon succeeded by Mrs. Braithwaite in 
 the foregoing prayer ; immediately after which, Rich- 
 ard Jordan and Elisha Bates, who sat at the head of 
 the meeting, shook hands as the customary signal 
 for a separation ; but, contrary to anything ever be- 
 fore witnessed by the stenographer, or by any other 
 
 1 Testimony of H. Jackson, Foster's Report, Vol. II. pp. 86 to 88. 
 
 2 Ibid. 
 
252 PHILADELPHIA YEAKLY MEETING OF 1827. 
 
 person with whom he has conversed, not a solitary 
 individual, among more than two thousand, was seen 
 to move ! 
 
 "In the course of about a minute, there was another 
 and a similar attempt made to close the meeting, by 
 R. Jordan, E. Robson, A. Braithwaite, and some per- 
 sons occupying the second galleries, but it was with 
 the same effect ! A profound silence now pervaded 
 the whole of this large assembly, and, in breathless 
 expectation, every eye seemed riveted with intense 
 interest upon the galleries. The whole meeting, si- 
 multaneously breaking through the rules of the so- 
 ciety, remained fixed and immovable, as if controlled 
 by some invisible power. Such was the effect, that 
 the beholder might have easily conceived himself 
 surrounded by a congregation of statues, instead of 
 animate beings. During this interval, Mr. Wether- 
 ald rose and delivered the following discourse, which 
 being succeeded b} 7 a few remarks from Elias Hicks, 
 a short pause ensued — when Mr. Hicks and Mr. 
 Wetherald shook hands, and the meeting quietly 
 dispersed." l 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE PHILADELPHIA YEARLY MEETING OF 1827 
 
 As the time approached for the assembling of Phi- 
 ladelphia Yearly Meeting, in the Spring of 1827, the 
 whole Society was agitated with conflicting hopes 
 
 T. Wetherald's Sermons, Phil. Ed. 1826. 
 
EXTRACTS FEOM JOHN COMLY'S JOURNAL. 253 
 
 and fears. It is impossible for those who have not 
 participated in the proceedings of Friends' Yearly 
 meetings, nor been imbued with the spirit that 
 pervades them, to appreciate the intense interest 
 with which every important movement of the body 
 is contemplated by its members. They have always 
 been, in some respects, a peculiar people : circum- 
 scribed in their pursuits by their self-denying testi- 
 monies, — debarred from fashionable amusements by 
 their conscientious scruples, — and educated to rever- 
 ence the religious principles of their forefathers, — 
 they are drawn by a strong affinity to seek for society 
 chiefly among themselves, although their liberal doc- 
 trines encourage Christian charity to all mankind. 
 This partial isolation from the world, which in former 
 times was more observable than now, contributed to 
 restrict their intercourse with other relio-ious societies, 
 and to cause increased attachment to their own. 
 
 Prior to the unhappy dissensions produced by 
 doctrinal controversy, religious intolerance, and de- 
 famation, the Society had been remarkable for its 
 harmony and brotherly love ; but now jealousy and 
 distrust prevailed, the meetings for discipline in the 
 city of Philadelphia were scenes of disputation, and 
 even into their assemblies for divine worship, once so 
 solemn and reverential, the demon of discord had 
 entered. 
 
 John Conily, who lived at Byberry, was not un- 
 frequently a visitor in the city, and has left in his 
 Journal the following remarks : " The solemnity of 
 silent adoration was often disturbed by denunciations 
 from the gallery against infidelity and other imagined 
 absurdities. Doctrines, till now unheard in meet- 
 ings of Friends, were reiterated and enforced with 
 22 
 
254 EXTRACTS FROM JOHN COMLY'S JOURNAL. 
 
 threatenings on those who should dare to reject 
 them. Thus dismay and confusion increased; the 
 youth and little children went to meetings with re- 
 luctance ; young men and women absented them- 
 selves ; some Friends openly talked of resigning 
 their rights in such a society, and many were exceed- 
 ingly tried on account of their families and children. 
 Many sober inquirers and friendly people who had 
 flocked to Friends' meetings now declined and left 
 their attendance. Thus the public meetings dimin- 
 ished in numbers, and the comfort and edification 
 once found in attending them was little to be felt or 
 enjoyed by the sincere seeker after truth. 'The ways 
 of Zion mourned, and the travellers walked in by- 
 ways.' 
 
 "Having thus viewed the awful state of Friends 
 in the city, and having seen the spreading of the 
 same spirit in various parts of our Yearly Meeting, 
 my mind had shared with others in deep exercise on 
 account of these things, and became impressed with 
 a religious concern to make a visit to the city, in 
 order to mingle with Friends, and to see and feel 
 whether any opening might present for active labor, 
 in endeavoring to promote a reconciliation between 
 the two contending parties. In accordance with this 
 view and impression, I attended the Quarterly Meet- 
 ing of Ministers and Elders held there in the Second 
 month, 1827, in which I had a full view of the na- 
 ture of that spirit that was seeking to bear rule in 
 the Society." * * * * 
 
 " Such a select meeting I had never before attended. 
 Painful indeed the spectacle ! But I learned some- 
 thing of the reality of what before I had only heard 
 ' by the hearing of the ear.' The meeting not being 
 
EXTRACTS FROM JOHN COMLY'S JOURNAL. 255 
 
 able to get through its business till near four o'clock 
 in the afternoon, occasioned a long sitting, trying to 
 the patience, but more so to the gentle feelings of 
 Christian meekness and love. 
 
 " Although this painful meeting afforded little pros- 
 pect of a reconciliation, my mind was turned toward 
 seeking for an opening to converse with some of the 
 active ones, in order to see and feel whether any door 
 of hope remained for healing the awful breach. But 
 some of them having long appeared to regard me 
 with an eye of suspicious jealousy, afforded no oppor- 
 tunity for such an interview. Cold, distant, inhospi- 
 table, they passed by and left me to myself. But I 
 learned much by this day's observation. 
 
 "The next day being First-day, I attended Pine 
 Street meeting. Silence appeared proper for me, 
 and a state of childlike docility. But my heart was 
 warmed with love to my fellow-creatures, and tender 
 compassion joined with Christian sympathy flowed 
 towards them. 
 
 "On Second-day attended the general Quarterly 
 Meeting, and was a silent observer of much confu- 
 sion and disorder. In the altercations that ensued 
 on several subjects brought before the meeting, I saw 
 the spirit of strife and contention rise higher and 
 higher, and that both parties were wasting their 
 strength for naught, and dissipating the feelings of 
 brotherly kindness in endeavors on the one hand to 
 carry through certain measures, and on the other to 
 oppose and prevent it. ' Contention and personal 
 reflection ' were not kept out of this meeting. Friends 
 were interrupted while speaking, harsh epithets were 
 applied to some, and irritation and warmth mani- 
 
256 EXTRACTS FROM JOHN COMLY's JOURNAL. 
 
 fested the unfitness of the meeting to transact its 
 business." * * * * 
 
 "Under these impressions and awful views of the 
 lamentable state of disorder into which the Society 
 was plunged, my mind was opened to see more clearly 
 that this contest would result in a separation of the 
 two conflicting parts of the Society, as the only means 
 of saving the whole from a total wreck ; and the way 
 and manner of this separation was clearly unfolded 
 to my mental vision : that on the part of Friends it 
 must be effected in the peaceable spirit of the non- 
 resisting lamb, — first, by ceasing from the spirit of 
 contention and strife, and then uniting together in 
 the support of the order and discipline of the Society 
 of Friends, separate and apart from those who had 
 introduced the difficulties, and who claimed to be the 
 orthodox part of the Society. 
 
 "A duty now presented to labour with Friends to 
 be still and quiet, and let the others go on with their 
 schemes and operations unmolested; that there was no 
 use in thus spending their strength; and that a way of 
 safety was about to open, by withdrawing from these 
 scenes of contention and disorder. In pursuing this 
 duty, and spreading the views that were given me of a 
 quiet peaceable retreat from this unavailing contest, the 
 only means of effecting it appeared to be, that Friends 
 in the cicy cease from all contention, and then throw 
 themselves into the arms of their country friends, by 
 requesting of some neighbouring Monthly meeting, 
 where they were generally united, to acknowledge and 
 receive them into its bosom as members, without cer- 
 tificates, because it was obvious they could not obtain 
 them from their respective meetings, if applied for. 
 And this departure from the common usage of the 
 
EXTRACTS FROM JOHN COMLY'S JOURNAL. 257 
 
 discipline would be all the change that need be made 
 in the order of society. The sympathy and tender 
 feelings of Friends in the country would doubtless 
 operate toward their suffering, fugitive Friends in the 
 city, and they will risk all consequences under the 
 consciousness of the purity of their motives. From 
 a monthly meeting which should thus adopt the 
 golden rule, the concern would spread to a quarterly 
 meeting, which would approve the measure ; and at 
 length other quarters would unite therein, till a yearly 
 meeting of Friends might come together in love, in 
 harmony, and peace. 
 
 " Among the effects that may result from such a 
 quiet, peaceable retreat from the scenes of discord that 
 now disgrace the Society, a prospective view was held 
 up that the youth would be gathered into a calm; 
 meetings would again be precious, instructive seasons ; 
 a living gospel ministry would be revived ; and many 
 would be drawn to attend Friends' meetings who 
 have latterly absented themselves therefrom; disci- 
 pline might again become a blessing to society, and 
 the testimonies of truth be again advanced and 
 upheld." 1 
 
 This ample extract from the Journal of John Comly 
 is deemed appropriate, as the clearest exposition we 
 have of the motives which actuated him and induced 
 him to propose to his friends " a quiet retreat," not 
 from the Society of Friends, but from the scenes of 
 disorder and contention that had destroyed its useful- 
 ness. Others may have conceived a similar plan, but 
 he appears to have been the first to propose it. The 
 act of separation did not originate with Elias Hicks, 
 
 1 Journal of J. Comly, p. 305 to 310. 
 22 * 2 L 
 
258 PHILADELPHIA YEAELY MEETING OF 1827. 
 
 as some have supposed, and there is no reason to 
 believe that he was consulted on the occasion. 
 
 The course recommended bv John Comlv, and ulti- 
 mately adopted, affords abundant evidence that he 
 and his friends were actuated by the peaceable Spirit 
 of the Lamb. Many have doubted whether they were 
 "wise as serpents," but none can deny that they were 
 "harmless as doves." They were fully persuaded that 
 the orthodox part}' in Philadelphia, having the clerks 
 of four of the Monthly meetings on their side, and 
 claiming to be the weighty part of the meetings, were 
 preparing to enter upon a system of disownment, in 
 order to eject from membership all who opposed 
 them. "I imparted to Friends," writes John Comly, 
 "a way of escape for them, if a system of disown- 
 ment should be adopted by the ruling party, now 
 nearly ready to use the Discipline for making a 
 separation." 
 
 In order to prevent the scattering of the flock, 
 which he thought would result from such measures, 
 he visited several of the country meetings, and con- 
 ferred with the most experienced and influential 
 Friends in relation to the momentous concerns that 
 occupied his attention. Some of them appeared cau- 
 tious and doubtful, but most of those he consulted 
 sympathized with him, and embraced the views he 
 presented. 
 
 On the 14th of the Fourth month, the Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Ministers and Elders, usually called the Select 
 Yearly Meeting, convened in Philadelphia. The Eng- 
 lish Friends, George and Ann Jones and Elizabeth 
 Robson, were in attendance, and took an active part. 
 
 The answers to the second query, which relates to 
 the state of the ministiy, were favorable, so far as each 
 
THE ORTHODOX COMMITTEE. 259 
 
 meeting answered for itself and its ministers, which 
 was all they had a right to do ; but the answer from 
 Philadelphia Quarter contained an appendix, brought 
 up from Pine Street Meeting, stating, in substance, 
 that ministers coming among them, preached " unsound 
 doctrines" or "doctrines that went to destroy the foun- 
 dation of the Christian religion." 1 This gratuitous 
 charge, irregularly brought forward, was seized upon 
 by one of the female ministers from England, who 
 had the presumption to say, that if the other Quar- 
 terly meetings, ten in number, had answered as hon- 
 estly as Philadelphia Quarter, they would have made 
 a similar report, thus calling in question the truthful- 
 ness of the official reports. She was supported in this 
 assertion by the other English Friends, as also by 
 some of the active members of Philadelphia Quarter, 
 and perhaps a few of the orthodox from the country. 
 On this report a proposition was founded to appoint 
 a committee to visit the subordinate meetings of min- 
 isters and elders throughout the Yearly Meeting. 
 This measure was urged by the orthodox party with 
 great earnestness, and as strenuously opposed by a 
 large number of Friends, principally from the country. 
 Jonathan Evans, the clerk, made a minute in accord- 
 ance with the wishes of his party, which doubtless he 
 considered the weighty part of the meeting, and then, 
 "notwithstanding the opposition to the measure was still 
 going on" he took down the names of the following 
 committee, viz.: Samuel Bettle, Wm. Jackson, Jona- 
 than Evans, Thomas Wister, Hinchman Haines, Wil- 
 liam Xewbold, Joseph "Whitall, Wm. Allinson, Sarah 
 
 1 J. Comly's Journal, p. 317. Test, of A. Lower, Foster's Eep., 
 I. 371, 372 ; and Test, of H. Jackson, II. 50. 
 
260 GENERAL YEARLY MEETING. 
 
 Cresson, Jane Bettle, Hannah vYhitall, Elizabeth 
 Keeve, Mary Wister, Elizabeth Allinson, and Mary 
 Morton. The whole committee were of the orthodox 
 party, several of them were ministers, and they were 
 expected to judge of the soundness of their brethren 
 and sisters in the ministry, and to condemn all doc- 
 trines that they deemed unsound. 1 This party meas- 
 ure, carried by disregarding the sentiments of a large 
 and valuable part of the meeting, was a source of 
 deep grief and despondency to many sincere hearts, 
 and a sad prelude of coming events. 
 
 On Second-day, the 16th of Fourth month, the 
 General Yearly Meeting assembled at Arch Street 
 house ; Samuel Bettle was at the table as clerk, and 
 John Comly as his assistant. The usual business of 
 the first sitting is to call the names of the representa- 
 tives from the Quarterly meetings, to read the certifi- 
 cates of visitors in attendance, and of epistles from 
 other Yearly meetings, and to appoint a committee 
 to prepare answers to the epistles. 
 
 While the meeting was engaged in this preliminary 
 business, a visit was announced from Elizabeth Rob- 
 son of England, and all proceedings were suspended 
 while she was en^asred in exhortation almost an hour, 
 "exciting to firmness as a well-disciplined army." 2 
 
 The meeting then proceeded with the business to 
 an unusually late hour. At half past one, it adjourned 
 till four, and during the interval, the representatives 
 were to meet in order to nominate a clerk and assist- 
 ant clerk for that year. 
 
 On calling over the names of the representatives, 
 
 1 Test, of A. Lower and II. Jacksun, Foster's Rep., I. 371, and 
 II. 51 ; and J. Comly's Journal, p. 318. 
 
 2 J. Cornly's Journal, p. 319. 
 
GENERAL YEARLY MEETING. 261 
 
 it appeared that the number from Abington, Bucks, 
 and the Southern Quarter were much larger than 
 usual. 1 
 
 The discipline provides that not less than four re- 
 presentatives shall be delegated by each Quarter, but 
 does not state how many beyond that number may 
 be appointed. Philadelphia Quarter, prior to 1827, 
 had sent three representatives from each Monthly 
 meeting. Most of the others had two from each 
 Monthly meeting. 2 
 
 There was no violation of discipline in sending 
 more, but the Orthodox party charged their opponents 
 with increasing the number at that time in order to 
 effect a change in the clerkship. The Friends from 
 Abington and Bucks asserted truly, that they had not 
 previously sent their due proportion. The Southern, 
 being a much smaller Quarter, had more than its due 
 proportion. The whole number of representatives 
 was 163, of whom it is said 45 were Orthodox. 
 
 It appears, by the testimony of two Friends, who were 
 representatives, that soon after they convened, John 
 Comly was proposed as clerk, and Samuel Bettle was 
 also named for the same station. 3 A warm debate 
 ensued between the two parties, each adhering stren- 
 uously to its candidate. Much the larger number 
 gave their voices for John Comly; — one of the wit- 
 nesses estimated the majority in his favor at two thirds ; 
 — but the orthodox party asserted that the weightier 
 part of the representatives were opposed to his nomi- 
 nation. To this it was replied, that they had no 
 
 1 Foster's Rep., Test, of Thos. Evans, Vol. I. pp. 265, 274. 
 
 2 Testimony of John Paul, Vol. II. p. 341. 
 
 3 Foster's Rep., Test, of A. Lower, I. 372; Test. Cephas Ross, 
 II. 4. 
 
 2L2 
 
262 CONTENTION RESPECTING THE CLERKSHIP. 
 
 means to judge of the weight of individuals; but 
 they were all representatives of Quarterly meetings, 
 and therefore stood on an equality. 
 
 Abraham Lower proposed that those who were in 
 favor of John Comly should withdraw to one side 
 of the house. This was strenuously resisted by the 
 Orthodox party, some of whom protested that it was 
 "like a political meeting to decide by a majority." 
 It was proposed that a Friend should go to the table 
 and take down the names of representatives who 
 were in favor of John Comly; but those opposed to 
 his nomination declared they would leave the house 
 if such a measure were attempted. Two Friends 
 went to the table for that purpose, and one of them 
 commenced writing ; some persons opened the door ; 
 — the yard was full of people, and the hour for meet- 
 ing being nearly come, they rushed into the house. 
 In the confusion that ensued, no business could be 
 transacted. A proposition was made, and assented 
 to by some, to meet next morning at 8 o'clock ; — 
 others, who were of the Orthodox party, requested 
 John Cox, a venerable and worthy minister, to report 
 that they could not agree. 
 
 When the Yearly Meeting assembled in the after- 
 noon, Samuel Bettle, the former clerk, read the open- 
 ing minute, and John Cox reported, that the repre- 
 sentatives could not agree in the nomination of a 
 clerk. An aged Friend said, he had been in the 
 habit of attending Yearly meetings for sixty years, 
 and it was always the practice to continue the old 
 clerks until new ones could be appointed. This as- 
 sertion, though literally true, was fallacious in its 
 application; for such a case, we believe, had never 
 occurred till then, and the practice of continuing the 
 
JOHN" comly's POSITION". 263 
 
 former clerk extended only to the first sitting. His 
 proposition was cordially united with by the Ortho- 
 dox party, but strenuously opposed by a large part 
 of the meeting. Such a scene of altercation and con- 
 fusion ensued, as was probably never before wit- 
 nessed in a Friends' Yearly Meeting. Samuel Bettle, 
 being urged by his friends, recorded himself clerk 
 and John Comly assistant, notwithstanding the per- 
 sistent opposition of many. 1 
 
 In relation to his own appointment, John Comly 
 writes as follows : "As assistant clerk, I was very un- 
 willing to resume my seat under such circumstances, 
 but it was urged by several Orthodox Friends, not 
 because of their unity with my being there, but be- 
 cause there seemed no other way than to suffer it to 
 be so under present circumstances. After being re- 
 peatedly solicited and hurried by them, I reluctantly 
 yielded as a present expedient, for I saw and felt the dis- 
 appointment and dissatisfaction among Friends to be 
 such, that a very little spark would kindle to an explo- 
 sion a mighty mass of feelings now working in the 
 agitated, grieved, and disgusted hearts of my brethren. 
 Partaking of the sympathy and exercise and travail 
 of the oppressed, I felt a disposition of condescen- 
 sion, and sat at the table during the remainder of 
 that sitting, though greatly to the grief of many of 
 my own dear friends, who considered my compliance 
 as a mark of submission and acquiescence with 
 orthodox measures, that ought to have been steadily 
 and firmly opposed; and that by thus yielding to 
 them I had virtually sanctioned their arbitrary pro- 
 ceedings and weakened or tied my own hands." 2 
 
 1 Foster's Rep., Test, of Halliday Jackson, Ab. Lower, Cephas 
 Ross, and Thos. Evans, Vol. I. 265, 372 ; Vol. II. 4, 52. 
 * Journal of J. C, p. 320. 
 
264 john comly's position. 
 
 At the close of the sitting, being spoken to by 
 Samuel Bettle on a charge of promoting a division 
 in the Society, John Comly replied, that he had not 
 promoted a division, but that a division existing which 
 he had not made nor promoted, he had seen that it 
 must terminate in the separation of the two parties. 
 As things were getting worse, and there was no hope 
 of a reconciliation, he had endeavored to prepare the 
 minds of Friends to look toward such a separation 
 in a quiet peaceable manner, so as to reorganize the 
 Society of Friends on the peaceable principle of love 
 and good will to all, without contention, and this in- 
 formation he wished Samuel Bettle to communicate 
 to his friends. This appeared to give satisfaction, 
 and was doubtless the very course that the Orthodox 
 party wished him to pursue. 
 
 Soon after the meeting was opened on Third-day 
 morning, John Comly rose and said in substance : 
 That it had been through condescension to a few 
 Friends that he took his seat at the table as assistant 
 clerk the preceding afternoon ; but as he did not con- 
 sider himself appointed with the unity of the meet- 
 ing, he was not easy to serve in that capacity under 
 existing circumstances. He then adverted to the 
 divided state of the Society, — that there were two 
 parties between whom love and unity did not subsist, 
 as became the followers of Christ, or as brethren. 
 Whatever may have been the cause of this difference, 
 he deemed it then useless to inquire ; but their duty 
 was to consider and feel after the best measures to 
 restore harmony. He therefore proposed, as the 
 Yearly Meeting was evidently not qualified for the 
 transaction of its business, that it should adjourn 
 
dr. parrish's address. 265 
 
 until it could come together in more harmony and 
 love. 
 
 He further observed, that if the meeting should 
 not accede to his proposal, he felt conscientiously 
 scrupulous of acting as its organ, inasmuch as he did 
 not consider himself appointed in the order nor with 
 the unity of the body. 
 
 A solemn stillness pervaded the congregation ; 
 and after a pause, Dr. Joseph Parrish, a Friend uni- 
 versally esteemed and beloved, arose, and advancing in 
 the aisle, commenced a pathetic appeal to the meeting. 
 He spoke of his ancestry, as having evinced their 
 deep attachment to the Society of Friends, and stated 
 that he and many of his contemporaries felt the same 
 warmth of affection for it and its principles ; he de- 
 plored the unhappy division of sentiment and party 
 feeling that existed among them, and adverting to 
 the proposition then before the meeting, his feelings 
 were so wrought upon, that the organs of utterance 
 failed, and an impressive solemnity was spread over 
 the meeting. 1 
 
 Several Friends united with the proposed adjourn- 
 ment; others opposed it on the ground of its novelty, 
 and because they apprehended it was designed to dis- 
 solve the Yearly Meeting. After more than half an 
 hour spent in its consideration, John Comly finding 
 that it could not be carried, and that even those whom 
 he considered the friends of good order were not pre- 
 pared for it, withdrew it. He rose and said, he saw 
 his proposition was not likely to be adopted, and as 
 the meeting would proceed with its business, and 
 many Friends expressed a wish that he should act as 
 assistant clerk, he felt disposed to submit and serve 
 
 1 Journal of J. Comly, 323. 
 IV— 23 
 
266 JOHN COMLY. 
 
 the meeting, provided Tie were now appointed by the 
 meeting, and this to be known by the general expres- 
 sion of unity. " This submission," he writes, " was 
 the result of the change which I saw and felt in the 
 state of the meeting from what it had been before, 
 and when those scruples impressed my mind ; and 
 from the view then opened of a little narrow path in 
 which I might be of use to the meeting as assistant 
 clerk, if appointed in the general unity, which was 
 now very largely expressed by very many voices." 1 
 
 John Comly continued to act as assistant clerk till 
 the close of the Yearly Meeting, very much to the 
 regret of some of his friends, who feared he would 
 thus commit himself to measures he could not ap- 
 prove. Whatever may be thought of the expediency 
 of his course, the purity of his motives cannot be 
 doubted. For a long time prior to the unhappy dis- 
 sensions then prevailing, he had been generally re- 
 garded as one of the best and wisest men in the 
 Society. Calm and deliberate in his movements, he 
 was remarkably qualified to give judicious counsel in 
 meetings for discipline, and in the exercise of his 
 gift as a minister he was clear, concise, and effective, 
 a "workman that need not be ashamed, rightly di- 
 viding the word of truth." Being a lover of peace, 
 he seldom engaged in controversy, and generally 
 acted upon the principle, that it is better to suffer 
 than contend. 
 
 The chief objection to Samuel Bettle as clerk, was 
 the ground he had previously taken, and afterwards 
 publicly avowed, that he did not consider any of 
 
 1 Journal of J. Comly, pp. 322, 325 ; and Test, of S. Bettle and 
 H. Jackson, Foster's Report, Vol. I. 266, and II. 54. 
 
SAMUEL BETTLE. 267 
 
 those who objected to the proposed declaration of 
 faith, as " entitled to any weight or influence at all." 1 
 As he professed also to decide by weight, — not num- 
 bers, — he virtually disfranchised a majority of the 
 Yearly Meeting, and threw the whole power into 
 the hands of his own party — the minority. After 
 this unwarrantable assumption of power, he ceased 
 to be the servant of the meeting, and was disqualified 
 for the clerkship. There was, however, another ob- 
 jection to his serving as clerk at that time. The 
 subject of Leonard Snowden's removal from the 
 eldership by Green Street Monthly Meeting had 
 been referred by Philadelphia Quarter to the Yearly 
 Meeting for its advice, and it was thought that 
 Samuel Bettle had taken so active a part in that 
 matter as to bias his judgment. From the same 
 quarter, an important proposition in relation to 
 appeals was also brought up; and from Bucks and 
 Abington Quarters, propositions to limit the terms 
 of appointments to the eldership and the Meeting for 
 Sufferings. And, moreover, the complaint of the 
 Southern Quarterly Meeting against the Meeting for 
 Sufferings was expected to come before the Yearly 
 Meeting. 
 
 Some of these propositions had come from one 
 party and some from the other ; it was evident that 
 the meeting was not in a condition to consider them 
 calmly, or to decide them satisfactorily, and there- 
 fore, by the tacit consent of both parties, they were 
 not taken up, but deferred ; except the case relating 
 to Leonard Snowclen, which was returned to Phila- 
 delphia Quarterly Meeting. 2 
 
 1 Testimony of S. Bettle, Foster's Report, I. 82. 
 8 Testimony of H. Jackson, Ibid. II. 55. 
 
268 CHAEITABLE MEASURES. 
 
 There was one measure in which both parties 
 united, and it is creditable to both that it was an act 
 of humanity. It was agreed to raise the sum of 
 three thousand dollars to assist the Yearly Meeting 
 of North Carolina in removing from that State a 
 large number of colored people under the care of 
 Friends, who had been manumitted and were liable, 
 if they remained, to be again enslaved. The Quar- 
 terly meetings were requested to contribute their 
 several quotas, which they complied with, and paid 
 them over to the treasurer of the Yearly Meeting. 1 
 
 The last act unitedly performed by the body of 
 Friends before its separation, was to relieve freed- 
 men of African descent. Their interest in that peo- 
 ple still continues, — and the hope is fondly cher- 
 ished, that the co-operation and sympathy of the two 
 sections of the Society in so good a work may yet 
 bring them nearer together. 
 
 It would have been gratifying to close this sad 
 chapter with the recital of so generous a deed ; but 
 unhappily the Yearly Meeting, then near its conclu- 
 sion, was again agitated and convulsed, through the 
 interference of one of the female ministers from 
 England. 2 She proposed, and the women's meet- 
 ing consented to appoint a committee to visit the 
 Monthly and Quarterly meetings. A deputation of 
 two women brought the proposition into the men's 
 meeting for its co-operation. At first, the meeting 
 seemed not disposed to unite with it, the clerk and 
 some of the Orthodox party, as well as other 
 Friends, expressing their judgment that the meeting, 
 
 1 Testimony of Thos. Evans and Halliday Jackson, Foster's 
 Report, Vol. I. 267, and II. 56. 
 
 2 Testimony of A. Lower and H. Jackson, Vol. 1. 374, and II. 56. 
 
REORGANIZATION. 269 
 
 at that late period, was not prepared to go into an 
 appointment. 
 
 At this juncture, a young man who had been, the 
 evening previous, at Green Street meeting-house, 
 where a conference of Friends was held, informed 
 the meeting of the measures adopted there prepara- 
 tory to a separation. This statement and disclosure 
 drew out from many an expression in favor of having 
 a committee appointed, and some of those who had 
 opposed it now became its advocates. It was strenu- 
 ously opposed by many Friends, and much excite- 
 ment prevailed; but the clerk proceeded to write a 
 minute, and those who belonged to his party nomi- 
 nated the whole committee, which was composed in 
 part of the same individuals who had been appointed 
 in the meeting of ministers and elders for a similar 
 purpose. 1 Those who were opposed to this measure 
 declined to take any part in it, but they remained in 
 the meeting till the closing minute was read, to meet 
 again " at the usual time next year, if the Lord 
 permit.' 
 
 "2 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 REORGANIZATION OF PHILADELPHIA YEARLY 
 
 MEETING. 
 
 After enduring for several years the sorrowful 
 effects produced by the divided -and distracted con- 
 
 1 Testimony of H. Jackson, Foster's Report, II. 56 ; and J. 
 Comly's Journal, p. 331. 
 
 2 Testimony of Thomas Evans, Foster's Report, I. 268. 
 
 23* IV — 2 M 
 
270 THE meeting's address. 
 
 dition of the Society, many valuable Friends, who 
 loved peace and abhorred contention, became pre- 
 pared, though reluctantly, to acquiesce in the neces- 
 sity of a separation. Events that transpired in the 
 early part of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, in 1827, 
 confirmed the impression, that a party, who were un- 
 questionably a minority of the body, were determined 
 to bear rule in an arbitrary manner, notwithstanding 
 the entreaties and remonstrances of their brethren. 
 The course pursued by the clerk of the Select Meet- 
 ing, and those who acted with him, — and the impo- 
 sition of a clerk upon the General Yearly Meeting by 
 the same party, in opposition to the greater part of 
 the body, — increased the dissatisfaction already pre- 
 vailing, and brought on the crisis. 
 
 On Fourth-day evening, the 18th of the 4th month, 
 being the third day of the Yearly Meeting, a number 
 of Friends, perhaps fifteen or twenty, met together at 
 a private house, and took into consideration the state 
 of the Yearly Meeting and the Society at large. A 
 few Friends were then nominated to prepare an ad- 
 dress, and a meeting for conference was appointed to 
 be held the next evening at Green Street meeting- 
 house. 1 
 
 On Fifth-day evening, a large number accordingly 
 assembled ; the essay of an address was produced, and 
 after some time spent in its consideration, they ad- 
 journed to the following evening. 
 
 On Sixth-day evening, the 20th, they resumed the 
 consideration of the address, and after some altera- 
 tions it was unanimously adopted. They then ad- 
 journed to meet again on the morrow. 
 
 1 Test, of II. Jackson, Foster's Hep., II. 59. 
 
THE meeting's addkess. 271 
 
 After the conclusion of the Yearly Meeting on 
 Seventh-day, the conference of Friends again assem- 
 bled at Green Street meeting-house. The essay of 
 an address being again read and weightily considered, 
 it was agreed that it be signed on behalf of the meet- 
 ing, and a suitable number of copies printed for 
 distribution. 
 
 The address, after adverting to the love and har- 
 mony that had formerly prevailed in the Society, and 
 the religious liberty Friends had asserted and enjoyed, 
 proceeds as follows: "With this great object in view, 
 our attention has been turned to the present condition 
 of this Yearly Meeting and its different branches ; and 
 by evidence on every hand, we are constrained to 
 declare that the unity of this body is interrupted, — 
 that a division exists among us, developing in its pro- 
 gress views which appear incompatible with each 
 other, and feelings averse to a reconciliation. Doc- 
 trines held by one part of the Society, and which we 
 believe to be sound and edifying, are pronounced by 
 the other part to be unsound and spurious. From this 
 has resulted a state of things that has proved destructive 
 of peace and tranquillity, and in which the fruits of love 
 and condescension have been blasted, and the com- 
 forts and enjoyments even of social intercourse greatly 
 diminished. Measures have been pursued which we 
 deem oppressive, and in their nature and tendency 
 calculated to undermine and destroy those benefits, to 
 establish and perpetuate which should be the purpose 
 of every religious association." * * * * 
 
 "It is under a solemn and deliberate view of this 
 painful state of our affairs, that we feel bound to ex- 
 press to you, under a settled conviction of mind, that 
 the period has fully come in which we ought to look 
 
272 A DIVISION PROPOSED. 
 
 toward making a quiet retreat from this scene of con- 
 fusion, and we therefore recommend to you deeply to 
 weigh the momentous subject, and to adopt such a 
 course as Truth, under solid and solemn deliberation, 
 may point to, in furtherance of this object, that our 
 Society may again enjoy the free exercise of its rights 
 and privileges. Arid we think proper to remind you 
 that we have no new gospel to preach, nor any other 
 foundation to lay than that already laid, and pro- 
 claimed by our forefathers, even ' Christ within, the 
 hope of glory,' — * the power of God and the wisdom 
 of God.' Neither have we any other system of disci- 
 pline to propose than that which we already possess; 
 believing that whilst we sincerely endeavour to live 
 and walk consistently with our holy profession, and 
 to administer it in the spirit of forbearance and love, 
 it will be found sufficient for the government of the 
 Church." ■ * * * * 
 
 "Having experienced, in the several sittings of this 
 conference, a comfortable evidence of divine regard, 
 imparting strength and encouragement to iook for- 
 ward to another friendly meeting together, this meet- 
 ing agrees to adjourn to the first Second-day in the 
 6th month next, at ten o'clock in the morning, at 
 Green Street meeting-house, Philadelphia, if the Lord 
 permit." 
 
 In the Fifth month, 1827, the committee appointed 
 six months before reported to Philadelphia Quarterly 
 
 1 The address was signed on behalf of the meeting by — 
 
 John Comly, Joshua Lippincott, 
 
 Robert Moore, John Hunt, 
 
 William Mode, Stephen Stephens, 
 
 Richard Barnard, Joseph G. Rowland, 
 
 John Watson, (Buckingham,) William Wharton. 
 
RULE OF DISCIPLINE. 273 
 
 Meeting a proposition to lay down Green Street 
 Monthly Meeting, and transfer the members to the 
 Monthly Meeting of the Northern District. This pro- 
 position, made in opposition to the wishes of the 
 members to be thus transferred, was, through the in- 
 fluence of the Orthodox party, recorded as adopted by 
 the Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 But Green Street Monthly Meeting, anticipating 
 this movement, had, the month previous, concluded 
 to dissolve its connection with Philadelphia Quarter, 
 and had given notice to that meeting before the con- 
 summation of the measure. 
 
 The Quarterly Meeting attempted to justify its pro- 
 ceedings by the following rule of discipline: "It is 
 agreed that no Quarterly meeting be set up or laid down 
 without the consent of the Yearly Meeting, no Monthly 
 meeting without the consent of the Quarterly Meeting; 
 nor any Preparative or other meeting for business or wor- 
 ship, till application to the Monthly Meeting is first 
 made, and when there approved, the consent of the Quar- 
 terly Meeting be also obtained." The Friends of Green 
 Street maintained, that, according to this rule, "a 
 Quarterly meeting has no other power than to confirm 
 or prevent the setting up or laying down of a Monthly 
 meeting. It is also clear that a Quarterly meeting 
 cannot lay down a ' Preparative or other meeting for 
 business or worship, till application to the Monthly 
 Meeting is first made, and ivhen there approved, the 
 consent of the Quarterly Meeting be also obtained.' 
 The terms, other meeting for business, in the clause, 
 must include a Monthly meeting." * * * * "The 
 absurdity of the application of the rule, as construed 
 by the Quarterly Meeting, becomes evident when 
 applied to the setting up of a Monthly meeting, with- 
 
 2M2 
 
274 TRANSFER OF MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 out the consent of the parties who are to compose 
 such meeting, — the same principle clearly applying 
 in both cases." 
 
 In the same month, application was made by Green 
 Street Monthly Meeting to be received as a branch 
 of Abington Quarterly Meeting; and there being "a 
 full and decided expression " in favor of it, that meet- 
 ing agreed to the proposition, and sent down to the 
 Monthly Meeting a minute of acceptance. 1 
 
 In like manner, Radnor Monthly Meeting withdrew 
 from Philadelphia Quarter, and was received as a con- 
 stituent part of Abington Quarter; and Mount Holly 
 Monthly Meeting detached itself from Burlington 
 Quarter, to become a branch of Bucks Quarterly 
 Meeting. 
 
 In these cases, the orthodox committee appointed 
 at the last sitting of the Yearly Meeting were in at- 
 tendance, and remonstrated without effect. 2 There 
 were, doubtless, some orthodox members in all the 
 meetings who objected, but they were so few in num- 
 ber that the "prevailing sense of the meetings " in favor 
 of the proceedings could not be mistaken or denied. 
 
 A large number of Friends from four of the 
 Monthly meetings of Philadelphia applied to be re- 
 ceived as members of Byberry and Darby Monthly 
 meetings, and were admitted without bringing cer- 
 tificates, which it was well known would have been 
 denied them by the Orthodox party, who had already 
 commenced proceedings against some of them. By- 
 berry and Darby Monthly meetings then instituted 
 each a meeting for worship in the city, and Abing- 
 
 1 Statement of Facts, Foster's Report, II. 450. 
 
 2 Test, of Jos. Whitall and T. Evans, Foster's Rep., Vol. I. pp. 
 222, 270. 
 
TRANSFER OF MEMBERSHIP. 275 
 
 ton Quarterly Meeting established there a meeting 
 for discipline, called the Monthly Meeting of Friends 
 of Philadelphia. 1 To this Monthly Meeting, as well 
 as to that of Green Street, persons living in the city, 
 and known to be in membership with Friends, were 
 admitted as members, or allowed to transfer their 
 rights without certificates. 
 
 These measures, preliminary to the reorganization 
 of the Yearly Meeting, were designed to forestall the 
 action of the Orthodox party, who intended to dis- 
 own all that participated in that movement. In 
 Philadelphia Quarter they had already begun their 
 disciplinary proceedings for this purpose, but were 
 frustrated by the Friends taking shelter under the 
 wings of other Quarterly meetings, after which their 
 papers of disownment were disregarded. 
 
 The transfer of membership without a certificate, 
 and the action of the Monthly and Quarterly meet- 
 ings in that emergency, were not in accordance with 
 the letter of discipline, but arose from the necessity 
 of the case. The Friends concerned in those extraor- 
 dinary proceedings believed that the compact had 
 been broken by the substitution of arbitrary power 
 for the spirit of love ; they saw no way to regain 
 their religious rights but by a reorganization, and for 
 such an exigency the rules of discipline did not and 
 could not provide. 
 
 In pursuance of its adjournment, the General 
 Meeting of Friends again met in conference at 
 Green Street meeting-house, Philadelphia, on the 
 4th and 5th days of the Sixth month, 1827, and 
 
 1 Testimony of Thomas Evans, Foster's Report, I. 270 ; and 
 Testimony of H. Jackson, II. p. 151. 
 
276 YEA.KLY MEETING IN TENTH MONTH. 
 
 adopted an epistle addressed, " To Friends of the 
 Quarterly and Monthly Meetings within the compass 
 of the Yearly Meeting held in Philadelphia." 
 
 In accordance with the recommendation of the 
 conference, the Quarterly meetings of Abiugton, 
 Bucks, and Concord, also the "Western and Southern 
 Quarters, appointed representatives to attend the 
 Yearly Meeting to be held in the Tenth month. In 
 the Southern Quarterly Meeting, little or no opposi- 
 tion was made, its members being generally united 
 in sentiment. In the other four Quarters, the ortho- 
 dox party made opposition, but being greatly in the 
 minority, they separated from, the main body and set 
 up meetings of their own, leaving Friends in posses- 
 sion of the meeting-houses. 
 
 On the 15th of Tenth month, 182T, the Yearly 
 Meeting assembled. The men occupied a large tem- 
 porary building erected for the occasion ; the women 
 met in Green Street meeting-house. "It was esti- 
 mated that nearly fifteen hundred men Friends were 
 in attendance, and a sensible solemnity and tender 
 feeling being experienced, the meeting appeared to 
 be owned by the Head of the Church." 1 
 
 Representatives were present from Abington, 
 Bucks, Concord, the Western and Southern Quar- 
 terly meetings, and also from Mount Holly, Chester- 
 field, and Radnor Monthly meetings. 
 
 A committee appointed at the General Meeting 
 held in the Sixth month, to attend to the state of the 
 
 1 Cockburn's Review, 225. Halliday Jackson testified : " I 
 think it was estimated that there were more than twenty-five 
 hundred including both sexes ; some thought near three thousand 
 attended at some of the sittings." Foster, Vol. II. p. 61 
 
CONCLUDING MINUTE. 277 
 
 Society and afford assistance to Friends under suffer- 
 ing, reported attention to the service. 
 
 A large committee of men and women Friends 
 was appointed to represent the Yearly Meeting in its 
 recess, and attend to the important concerns which 
 claimed the attention of the body. It was unani- 
 mously recommended that the ministers and elders 
 present should meet in a yearly-meeting capacity on 
 the next morning, and sit as heretofore on its own 
 adjournments. 
 
 A committee appointed to draught an address to 
 Friends within the compass of the Yearly Meeting, 
 produced one, which was adopted and 10,000 copies 
 directed to be printed aud distributed to the Quar- 
 terly and Monthly meetings. An epistle to Balti- 
 more Yearly Meeting was also deliberately consid- 
 ered and adopted. 
 
 On the 19th of the month, the concluding minute 
 was read, as follows : 
 
 " Having been favoured, through the unmerited 
 mercy of the Head of the Church, to witness in the 
 several sittings of this meeting the baptizing influ- 
 ence of his own blessed Spirit cementing us together 
 in the bond of gospel love, and enabling us to con- 
 duct the weighty affairs of the church in much broth- 
 erly affection and harmony, and feeling grateful for 
 the favour, the meeting concludes to meet again on 
 the second Second-clay of the Fourth month next, if 
 the Lord permit. Benjamin Ferris, Clerk" 
 
 From the epistle addressed " To the Quarterly, 
 Monthly, and Particular Meetings of Friends," 
 within the compass of Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
 ing, the following passages are selected : — " Our pro- 
 fession is high and holy ; and let us be increasingly 
 
 24 
 
278 EPISTLE TO THE VAKIOUS MEETINGS. 
 
 concerned to walk consistently therewith. The pa- 
 tient sufferings of our faithful predecessors finally 
 established for them an excellent name, even 
 amongst their persecutors. They held up with prac- 
 tical clearness a peaceable testimony against ' wars 
 and fightings,' and by a scrupulous adherence to the 
 principles of justice, became proverbial for integrity. 
 In the present afflicting state of things, we feel deeply 
 concerned that their example in these respects may 
 be kept steadily in view, — that our religious testi- 
 monies may never be wounded by contending for 
 property and asserting our rights; — that no course 
 be pursued, although sanctioned by the laws of the 
 excellent government under which we live, that may 
 be at variance with the spirit of that holy Lawgiver 
 who taught his disciples, * If any man will sue thee 
 at the law and take away thy coat, let him have thy 
 cloak also ; ' and who set forth his own situation as it 
 related to this world when he said, ' The foxes have 
 holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the 
 Son of man hath not where to lay his head.' 
 
 "And we tenderly exhort, that in places where our 
 numbers constitute the larger part of any meeting, 
 their conduct may be regulated by the rule laid down 
 by our blessed Lord: 'Whatsoever ye would that men 
 should do to you, do ye even so to them.' The dis- 
 cipline under which we act positively discourages 
 members of our Society from suing each other at 
 law. To violate this discipline in a meeting capa- 
 city, is not only a departure from our established or 
 der, but is calculated to injure us in the eyes of sober 
 inquirers after truth, and to disturb the peace of our 
 own minds." 
 
 A separation took place in the other Quarterly 
 
THE REORGANIZED YEARLY MEETING. 279 
 
 meetings of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in the fol- 
 lowing order: at Salem, Burlington, and Cain, in 
 the Eleventh month ; at Haddonh'eld, in the Twelfth 
 month ; and at Shrewsbury and Eahway, in the Sec- 
 ond month following. 1 As the Orthodox party in 
 most of the Quarterly and Monthly meetings were 
 much the smaller number, they usually effected a 
 separation by remaining in the meeting-house after 
 the minute of adjournment was read ; and then ap- 
 pointing a clerk, they proceeded to business, or ad- 
 journed to another time and place. In most places, 
 on account of the smallness of their numbers, they 
 procured other houses to hold their meetings; but in 
 some instances both sections continued, for a time, 
 to use the same meeting-house, separated on First- 
 days by a partition, and holding their mid-week 
 meetings on different days. At Burlington and 
 some other places, the Orthodox -section being much 
 the larger, retained the meeting-houses. 
 
 It was a time of deep distress to many sincere 
 Friends in both sections. Members of the same 
 family were often divided in sentiment and attended 
 different meetings; old associations and tender friend- 
 ships were severed, and not unfrequently, acrimo- 
 nious feelings were too much indulged. 
 
 In the Spring of 1828, the reorganized Yearly 
 Meeting again assembled, and representatives were 
 present from all the Quarters except Philadelphia. 
 The Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia, and that of 
 Green Street, having been attached to Abington 
 Quarter, were represented through it, and a large 
 number of Friends residing in the city were in at- 
 tendance. 
 
 1 Testimony of Joseph Whitall, Foster's Report, I. 224. 
 
280 EPISTLE TO Y. M. OF LONDON". 
 
 An epistle addressed to the meeting by the Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends held in Baltimore was received and 
 read, and its lively, pertinent contents were truly con- 
 solatory and acceptable. On entering upon the con- 
 sideration of the state of the Society as exhibited in 
 the answers to the queries, the meeting was brought 
 under a deep concern and exercise for the removal 
 of existing weaknesses and for the promotion of the 
 cause of truth and righteousness. 
 
 In accordance with a proposition from Abington 
 Quarter, it was agreed to establish a Quarterly Meet- 
 ing, to be composed of Radnor, Green Street, and Phi- 
 ladelphia Monthly meetings, to be denominated " Phi- 
 ladelphia Quarterly Meeting of Friends." A Quar- 
 terly meeting of ministers and elders was connected 
 with it, as prescribed in the rules of discipline. 
 
 A committee was appointed to represent the Yearly 
 Meeting during its recess, and hence called the Re- 
 presentative Committee. Its functions are the same 
 as those formerly delegated to the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings ; it reports to the Yearly Meeting, and is re- 
 appointed every year. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting continued its sittings from 
 the 14th to the 18th of the Fourth month, conduct- 
 ing its business in harmony and brotherly love. It 
 addressed epistles to the other Yearly meetings of 
 Friends on this continent and in England. From 
 that addressed to the Yearly Meeting of London the 
 following passage is selected : — 
 
 "For a long course of years, through the prevailing 
 influence of Christian love, Friends had been enabled 
 to stand a united body and prosecute their religious 
 concerns in harmony and mutual condescension. 
 From a variety of causes, originating, as we believe, 
 
THE ORTHODOX SECTION. 281 
 
 in unfaithfulness to the clear discoveries of that 
 heavenly light which eminently dawned on our So- 
 ciety in the beginning, this blessed harmony has been 
 interrupted. In this part of the vineyard, that divine 
 charity which stands pre-eminent among the fruits 
 of the Holy Spirit, was very much lost, and a spirit 
 of judgment out of the truth usurped its place, pro- 
 ducing divisions and contentions not only destructive- 
 to the peace of the Church, but subversive of its order 
 and discipline. In this very afflictive state of society, 
 its deeply exercised members appealing from the par- 
 tial tribunal of human decision to the merciful seat 
 of divine judgment, where purity of motive always 
 finds acceptance, and bowing in awfulness and hu- 
 mility before Him who has promised to lead his de- 
 voted children in 'paths that they have not known,' 
 they were favored to discover a way cast up for their 
 deliverance. It is with unfeigned gratitude to the 
 God of all our sure mercies we are bound to acknowl- 
 edge that he has not only opened the way, but led us 
 on step by step, and endued us with power to advance 
 therein, until he has brought us, as a people, into the 
 possession of love, and harmony, and peace." 
 
 The spirit of brotherly love which pervades this 
 epistle was manifested in the action of the Yearly 
 Meeting towards the orthodox party. No measures 
 were taken with a view to their disownment, but, on 
 the contrary, they were left at liberty to come into 
 fellowship with Friends without being dealt with as 
 offenders. 
 
 At the usual time in the Fourth month, 1828, the 
 Orthodox section held their Yearly Meeting at Arch 
 Street house, Philadelphia. They took measures to 
 render the separation complete, by initiating a course 
 
 24* 2N 
 
282 THE ORTHODOX SECTION". 
 
 of disciplinary proceedings to lay down meetings and 
 disown members wherever their authority was not 
 recognized. Thus, for instance, the Southern Quar- 
 terly Meeting was declared to be laid down, with all 
 its monthly meetings, and the members, by the same 
 summary process, were said to be attached to another 
 Quarterly meeting, without any of the usual care 
 being bestowed upon them. 1 
 
 In other Quarterly meetings, a minority of the 
 members — often a very small fragment — was made 
 to assume the functions of the whole body, — laying 
 down Monthly meetings, and attaching the members, 
 without their knowledge or consent, to other meet- 
 ings. 
 
 The beneficent design of the Discipline in dealing 
 with offenders for their own good, in order to reclaim 
 them, was entirely ignored, and the purpose of cut- 
 ting off from membership seemed to be the only end 
 kept in view. In the same spirit of crimination, a 
 "Declaration" was issued by the orthodox Yearly 
 Meeting of Philadelphia, replete with grave accusa- 
 tions against the other section of the Society, with the 
 obvious intention of prejudicing the public against 
 them, and placing them without the pale of Christian 
 charity. This defamatory publication has been an- 
 swered, and its charges refuted, in a "Review" by 
 "William Gibbons, published at Philadelphia, in 
 1847. 
 
 In the 8th month, 1828, Philadelphia Quarterly 
 Meeting was opened at Cheery Street meeting-house. 
 It was then composed of Radnor, Green Street, and 
 
 1 Test, of J. Whitall, an Orthodox witness. " Ques. Was the 
 Southern Quarterly Meeting ever labored with, before it was lai(? 
 down. Ans. I believe not." Foster's Rep., Vol. I. p. 259. 
 
THE REORGANIZATION ACCOMPLISHED. 283 
 
 Philadelphia Monthly meetings, and a few months 
 subsequently the Monthly Meeting held at Roaring 
 Creek was annexed to it. 
 
 The reorganization of Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
 ing being thus accomplished, it may not be inappro- 
 priate to consider the grounds on which the measure 
 was justified by its authors. It has been shown in 
 the preceding narrative that discord prevailed to such 
 a degree as to destroy the objects of religious asso- 
 ciation, and even to impair the harmony of social . 
 intercourse. A division existed, and a separation 
 appeared inevitable ; but was the method adopted 
 the best that could have been pursued ? 
 
 It has been asserted, that, had the majority of the 
 representatives, in 1827, signed a report nominating 
 another clerk, the Yearly Meeting must have acceded 
 to it, or the minority would have retired and set up 
 another meeting, thus leaving the larger body in pos- 
 session of the house. It appears that this course was 
 proposed and attempted, but was frustrated by delay 
 and indecision. 
 
 Again, it has been supposed, that, had John Comly, 
 at the time he declined to act as assistant clerk, pro- 
 posed to withdraw and set the example, two thirds of 
 the Yearly Meeting would have gone with him. 
 This supposition may be correct, but much disorder 
 would have ensued, and the result would not have 
 been more favorable than that which arose from the 
 course adopted. 
 
 The plan proposed by John Comly and carried 
 into effect, was doubtless based upon the idea, that, 
 the Yearly Meeting having been originally organized 
 by representatives from Monthly or Quarterly meet- 
 ings, with other members in attendance, it could, 
 
284 PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JEESEY. 
 
 without a departure from Friends' principles, be re- 
 organized by a convention of delegates from the con- 
 stituent meetings. 
 
 It appears, by the earliest historical account of 
 Friends' meetings in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 
 that the Monthly Meeting of Burlington, held the 2d 
 day of the Third month, 1681, " concluding that a 
 Yearly Meeting might have a general service, unani- 
 mously agreed to establish one in Burlington, the 
 first of which was to begin the 28th of the Sixth 
 month following; of which notice was given, and 
 they accordingly met at the house of Thomas Gar- 
 diner. On the 31st they proceeded to regulate such 
 business in the Society as was then necessary, partic- 
 ularly in appointing the times and places, when and 
 where the different meetings for business throughout 
 the country were to be thereafter held, among which 
 a general one for worship was established to be held 
 yearly at Salem on the 2d First-day of the Second 
 month. Having settled these and other matters, they 
 adjourned to the 6th of the Seventh month in the 
 succeeding year, then to meet at the same place." 1 
 
 Such was the origin of the Yearly Meeting of 
 Pennsylvania and New Jersey. At the time it was 
 instituted, there were but three Monthly meetings in 
 New Jersey, viz., Shrewsbury, established in 1670; 
 Salem, in 1676 ; and Burlington, in 1678. 
 
 It appears by the same authority, that, about the 
 year 1680, the Friends at Burlington established "a 
 Quarterly Meeting among themselves," and that 
 Shrewsbury Monthly Meeting was attached to it in 
 1682. 
 
 At the time the Yearly Meeting was instituted at 
 
 1 Smith's History. Hazard's Register, Vol. VI. p. 184. 
 
STRENGTH OF THE TWO PARTIES. 285 
 
 Burlington, there were Yearly meetings in Rhode 
 Island and Maryland which had been in existence 
 some years, and there is reason to believe that with 
 these a correspondence was opened, but there is no 
 evidence that their consent or assistance was deemed 
 requisite to the establishment of the new Yearly 
 Meeting. 
 
 In like manner, when Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
 ing was reorganized by the action of Quarterly and 
 Monthly meetings within its limits, the neighboring 
 Yearly Meeting of Baltimore, then undivided, opened 
 a correspondence with it, and in the following year 
 the Yearly Meeting of New York gave it the same 
 evidence of religious fellowship. 
 
 Soon after the separation, measures were taken to 
 ascertain the relative numbers of the two parties, and 
 the following census, " so far as ascertained up to the 
 year 1829," was produced and vouched for in the tes- 
 timony of Halliday Jackson. 1 
 
 1. Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting. total. 
 
 Number of Friends, including men, women, 
 
 and minors, ...... 2676 
 
 Number of those called Orthodox, including 
 
 men, women, and minors, .... 2643 
 
 Number of Neutrals, or those undecided, . 14 
 
 2. Abington Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, including men, women, 
 
 and minors, 2829 
 
 Number of those called Orthodox, including 
 
 men, women, and minors 321 
 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, . . 3 
 
 5333 
 
 3153 
 
 Carried over, 8486 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. II. p. 461. 
 
 2N2 
 
286 
 
 STRENGTH OF THE TWO PARTIES. 
 
 Brought forward 
 
 3. Bucks Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo- 
 men, and minors, .... 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, 
 
 4. Concord Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo 
 
 men, and minors, .... 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, 
 
 5. Western Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo 
 
 men, and minors, .... 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, 
 
 6. Caln Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo 
 
 men, and minors, .... 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, 
 
 total, 
 8486 
 
 2831 
 
 489 
 16 
 
 2573 
 
 788 
 75 
 
 2296 
 
 454 
 70 
 
 921 
 
 557 
 175 
 
 The numbers in the following Quarterly meet- 
 ings were ascertained under commissions issued 
 from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania for 
 Eastern District. 
 
 7. Southern Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors, 501 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo- 
 men, and minors, ..... 30 
 
 8. Burlington Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors, 1049 
 Number of those called Orthodox, . . 800 
 
 3336 
 
 3436 
 
 2820 
 
 1653 
 
 531 
 
 1S49 
 
 Carried over, 
 
 22,111 
 
STRENGTH OF THE TWO PARTIES. 287 
 
 TOTAL. 
 
 Brought forward, 22,111 
 
 Haddonfield Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors, 821 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo- 
 men, and minors, ..... 789 
 
 Number of Neutrals, or undecided, . . 76 
 
 1686 
 
 10. Salem Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors, 1238 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo- 
 men, and minors, 298 
 
 11. Shrewsbury and Rahway Quarterly Meeting. 
 
 Number of Friends, men, women, and minors, 750 
 Number of those called Orthodox, men, wo- 
 men, and minors, 175 
 
 1536 
 
 925 
 
 Total, 26,258 
 
 Aggregate of Friends, as far as ascertained, within 
 
 the Yearly Meeting, up to. 1829, . . . .18,485 
 Aggregate of those called Orthodox, to same period, 7,344 
 Aggregate of Neutrals, or undecided, " 429 
 
 Total, 26,258 
 
 In 21 Monthly meetings in Pennsylvania the num- 
 bers were taken as both parties stood at the division. 
 
 It is proper to observe that this census differs some- 
 what from a statement furnished by Thomas Evans, an 
 Orthodox witness, in relation to six of the Quarterly 
 meetings, viz., Philadelphia, Cain, Burlington, Haddon- 
 field, Salem, and Shrewsbury and Rahway. 1 Accord- 
 ing to his statement, those whom he calls " Hicksites," 
 in these six Quarters, numbered 6123, being 1332 less 
 than the census, and the Orthodox numbered 7241, 
 being 1979 more than the census. As there were but 
 
 1 Foster's Report, II. 495. 
 
288 FURTHER SEPARATIONS. 
 
 few of the Orthodox party in the other five Quarters, 
 they did not deem it expedient to offer any statement 
 of their number. If the statement of Thomas Evans 
 were substituted, as far as it goes, for that of Halliday 
 Jackson, the result would be, in the whole Yearly 
 Meeting, 17,153 Friends, and 9323 orthodox Friends. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 SEPARATIONS IN NEW YORK, OHIO, INDIANA, AND 
 BALTIMORE YEARLY MEETINGS. 
 
 The elements of discord, which led to the separation 
 in Philadelphia, existed to some extent in other 
 Yearly meetings, and the intimate relations they 
 maintained with each other could not fail to bring 
 the subjects of controversy under the notice of all. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting, composed of Friends of New 
 York, Vermont, Connecticut, and the province of 
 Canada, convened in the city of New York on Second- 
 day, the 26th of Fifth month, 1828. In the Yearly 
 Meeting of Ministers and Elders, held on the Seventh 
 day preceding, John Barrow, who had been clerk the 
 year before, opened the meeting as usual, and at the 
 close of the first sitting the representatives remained 
 together to nominate a clerk. When the meeting 
 convened in the afternoon, one of the representatives 
 reported that they had agreed to propose John Barrow 
 as clerk; soon after which another of the representa- 
 tives signified that the name proposed was not their 
 choice. It appeared that the representatives were 
 divided into two parties, each of w T hich had a name to 
 propose, and each claiming to be the greater number. 
 
FURTHER SEPARATIONS. 2iJ 
 
 As there was much diversity of sentiment and no 
 decision could be made in unity, John Barrow wrote 
 a minute, stating, in substance, that, "as there was no 
 choice on the part of the representatives, and the 
 meeting was evidently not united on any Friend to 
 serve as clerk, the present clerk was requested to 
 serve until the meeting was more united." His 
 understanding of this minute was, as he subsequently 
 stated, that he should serve until the next sitting. 1 
 He accordingly did so, and then, after the withdrawal 
 of the orthodox party, he was appointed clerk. 
 
 "When the Yearly Meeting for Discipline assembled 
 on Second-day morning, Samuel Parsons, the clerk 
 who had been appointed the year previous, took his 
 seat at the table, but he did not observe the usual 
 custom of bringing 1 with him the book of minutes, nor 
 did he lay on the table the reports from the Quarterly 
 meetings. 2 He read an opening minute, and called the 
 names of the representatives from a slip of paper he 
 held in his hand. It was then his duty, according to 
 usage, to read the reports from the Quarterly meetings, 
 but at this juncture Thos. Shillitoe, a minister from 
 England, rose and stated that a large number of indi- 
 viduals were there who had been regularly disowned, 
 and in strong terms he protested against the meeting's 
 proceeding with its business while these persons were 
 present. He alluded to Friends from Philadelphia, 
 who were members of the reorganized Yearly Meeting. 
 This interference by a member of another yearly meet- 
 ing was a step that ought to have been discountenanced 
 as indecorous; but it was seconded by several prominent 
 members of the orthodox party. Nicholas Brown, of 
 
 1 Test, of J. Barrow, Foster's Rep., Vol. II. pp. 261, 270. 
 
 2 Test, of S. Parsons, Foster's Rep., I. 178. 
 IV — 25 
 
290 FURTHER, SEPARATIONS. 
 
 Canada West, a minister and a member of Few York 
 Yearly Meeting, urged the clerk to read the reports 
 from the Quarterly meetings, and then, the meeting 
 being properly opened, the subject that had been 
 mentioned might claim its attention. Elias Hicks 
 deprecated the discussion of that subject as being cal- 
 culated to lower the dignity of the meeting. He 
 thought the Friends alluded to had as good a right to 
 sit as any who were present. The discussion was 
 continued for some time with much warmth, until an 
 orthodox minister proposed that those who were op- 
 posed to the sitting of the persons alluded to should 
 retire to the basement story, which was united with 
 by several of that party. Nicholas Brown then re- 
 marked, that after the proposition they had just heard, 
 it was time the meeting should act with decision ; — 
 that the person at the table was not disposed to serve 
 the meeting, but a party, — that he had not brought 
 the book of minutes, — and that his intention evi- 
 dently was, to separate from the meeting and take its 
 books and papers. He expressed his opposition to 
 anything like an adjournment, and suggested that the 
 representatives should name a clerk that would serve 
 the meeting. This proposition being united w : th by 
 many, — the representatives, most of whom had been 
 previously together in conference on the subject, 
 named Samuel Mott for clerk. 1 
 
 Samuel Parsons then rose with a paper in his hand, 
 which he proposed to read. Many persons, suspect- 
 ing it was a minute of adjournment, strenuously ob- 
 jected to his reading it, while the orthodox party in- 
 sisted that he should proceed. Elias Hicks suggested 
 
 1 Narrative of Thos. McClintock ; see The Fd. or Adv. of Truth 
 Vol. I. p. 186. 
 
FURTHER SEPARATIONS. 291 
 
 that he should be permitted to read it, and then the 
 meeting would be able to judge. Samuel Parsons 
 said it was not a minute of adjournment, and he pro- 
 ceeded to read what he called a " minute for contin- 
 uing the sitting of the Yearly Meeting in the base- 
 ment story of the meeting-house." When he reached 
 that part of it which stated, that " the Pennsylvania 
 intruders were unsound in principle and disorderly in 
 practice" 1 the meeting was deeply agitated, and the 
 noise became so great that the reading could not be 
 heard. 
 
 Samuel Mott, being called to go to the table, made 
 an effort to ascend the gallery steps, but the way 
 being closed, he was obliged to step over the gallerv- 
 rail, and by the time he reached the table, Samuel 
 Parsons had nearlv finished reading his minute, 
 which, though inaudible to the meeting at large, 
 seemed to be understood by his party. They im- 
 mediately withdrew, and finding the basement story 
 locked, they proceeded to the Medical Hall which 
 had been previously offered to them. 
 
 About two hundred and forty-five individuals, in- 
 cluding twenty of the representatives, withdrew ; 
 while those who remained numbered about seven 
 hundred, including sixty-three representatives. 2 
 
 It is obvious that the minute read by Samuel Par- 
 sons was not the act of the meeting, but was made 
 to suit the views of a small minority. 
 
 A separation took place, on the afternoon of the 
 same day, in the women's Yearly Meeting, by the 
 
 withdrawal of the orthodox party; but not having 
 
 _ 
 
 1 Test, of S. Parsons, Foster's Report, Vol. I. p. 181. 
 
 2 Test, of H. Jackson, and Exhibit 0, Foster's Report, Vol. II. 
 pp. 69 and 459. 
 
292 EPISTLE OF ADVICE. 
 
 the clerk with them, they did not take the books and 
 papers, as had been done in the men's meeting. 
 
 After the secession of the Orthodox party, the 
 Yearly Meeting continued its deliberations in entire 
 harmony, and issued an Epistle of Advice to its 
 members, from which the following passage is se 
 lected: — 
 
 "Such, dear friends, being the state of our affairs, 
 we may anticipate difficulty in our subordinate and 
 lesser meetings from those who have separated them- 
 selves. Of the trials which will be attendant on the 
 present state of things among us, in our Quarterly, 
 Monthly, and Preparative meetings, we wish affec- 
 tionately to apprise you. And, dear friends, we 
 entreat you humbly to seek for counsel and direction 
 at the Divine fountain of all true wisdom. "We de- 
 sire that on all occasions we may be actuated by a 
 spirit of tenderness and love towards those who have 
 gone from us, and that our conduct may give evidence 
 that we are governed by those truly Christian prin- 
 ciples under the influence of which we cannot render 
 railing for railing, but, contrariwise, blessing; — un- 
 der the influence of these blessed principles we Bhall 
 be preserved from a spirit of accusation and denuncia- 
 tion towards any who may differ in opinion on points 
 not involving the practice of Christian virtues. We 
 shall hence be willing to concede to others those in- 
 estimable privileges which we claim for ourselves, 
 and shall not be found violating the divine rule, 'As 
 ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even 
 so to them.' And thus, while we temperately but 
 firmly maintain our rights, we shall not encroach 
 upon the rights of others. But humblj* relying on 
 the guidance and direction of the Spirit of Christ, 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 293 
 
 we shall know it to be the 'wisdom of God and the 
 power of God,' and shall experience the unity of his 
 Holy Spirit to be the bond of peace in all our assem- 
 blies. Since the separation has taken place, our 
 meeting has continued large, and we have been able 
 to rejoice in the evidence of this blessed unity in 
 which the affairs of the Church have been harmo- 
 niously transacted, and Friends have been edified to- 
 gether." 
 
 In the year 1828 or '29, the Meeting for Sufferings 
 sent a circular to all the Monthly meetings compos- 
 ing the Yearly Meeting, requesting them to appoint 
 committees in each meeting, to examine carefully the 
 number of persons composing each Monthly meet- 
 ing, designating the number of Friends, the number 
 that had separated, and those who remained neutral. 
 The returns showed the following result : — 
 Friends, 12,532; Orthodox, 5,913; Neutrals, 857. 1 
 
 In the autumn of *1828, a separation took place in 
 Ohio Yearly Meeting of Friends, attended by a scene 
 of disorder and tumult painful to contemplate and 
 mortifying to both parties who were engaged in it. 
 As it became the subject of judicial investigation, 
 our chief reliance for a knowledge of the facts will 
 be drawn from the testimony of witnesses given in 
 evidence before Judge Hallock at Steubenville, Ohio. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting which met at Mount Pleasant, 
 was composed of five Quarterly meetings, namely, 
 Redstone, Short Creek, Salem, Stillwater, and New 
 Garden, in all of which, except the first, the separa- 
 tion had already taken place, and each party had ap- 
 
 1 Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 263, 463. 
 25* IV — 2 
 
294 SEPARATION IN OHIO. 
 
 pointed representatives ; so that there were in attend- 
 ance double sets of representatives from all the Quar- 
 ters except Redstone. 1 In each of the four divided 
 Quarterly meetings, the orthodox section had ap- 
 pointed guards to keep the doors of the Yearly meet- 
 ing-house, and exclude persons who had been dis- 
 owned or were under dealings. 2 It had been custom- 
 ary in former years to appoint door-keepers to ex- 
 clude from the meetings for discipline those who 
 were not members of the Society, and no unpleasant 
 consequences had followed, because there was then 
 no dispute as to rights of membership. 
 
 The case was now entirely altered ; each party 
 claimed all the rights of membership, and those called 
 Orthodox had already begun to disown their oppo- 
 nents who did not acknowledge the authority of their 
 meetings nor the validity of their excommunications. 
 In order to illustrate this point, the case of Isaac 
 James may be cited, who was one of those intended 
 to be excluded. He was a member of Concord 
 Monthly Meeting, which had consisted of about 
 forty families, of whom only eleven or twelve were 
 orthodox. This small minority, in opposition to the. 
 sense of the meeting, applied to Short Creek Quarter 
 to lay down their Monthly Meeting, alleging that it 
 could not be held to the credit of the Society. A 
 minute was accordingly made to lay it down and 
 attach the members to Short Creek Monthly Meet- 
 ing, but a large majority of the members refused to 
 submit to this arbitrary measure, and Isaac James 
 
 1 Testimony of Elisha Bates, Report of Trial by M. T. C. 
 Gould, p. 20. 
 
 2 Test, of E. Bates, Jonathan Taylor, and D. Steer, Ibid. pp. 
 21, 33, G5. 
 
SEPARATION IN" OHIO. 295 
 
 being one of this. number, was, for that reason, dis- 
 owned by the Orthodox party. 1 
 
 In like manner, Plainfield Monthly Meeting was 
 laid clown by the Orthodox party, in opposition to 
 the wishes of nine-tenths of its members. 2 
 
 The principle on which these proceedings were 
 conducted was avowed in the testimony of Elisha 
 Bates, the most prominent among the leaders of that 
 party, and subsequently clerk of their Yearly Meeting. 
 
 Question. "Does the majority usually disown, or the 
 minority?" Answer, by E. Bates. "In some cases 
 a minority may do it." Question. "If a meeting be 
 composed of fifty members, is it in the power of ten 
 to disown forty ? " "Yes." "Is it in the power of 
 three to disown forty-seven?" "Yes; a very small 
 number may do it." 3 
 
 The guards were instructed to exclude from the 
 meetings for discipline, not only those who, like 
 Isaac James, were regarded by the Orthodox party 
 as disowned persons, but also Friends standing in the 
 same position, who should attend from other Yearly 
 meetings, where a separation had taken place. 
 
 A large number of ministers and other Friends 
 were in attendance from distant meetings. Among 
 them were Thomas Shillitoe, and Isaac and Anna 
 Braithwait from England; Elias Hicks from Long 
 Island, Amos Peaslee from Kew Jersey, Elisha 
 Dawson from Delaware, and Halliday Jackson from 
 Darby, Pennsylvania. 
 
 On Seventh-day morning preceding the Yearly 
 Meeting, a committee of six persons called on Elias 
 
 1 Testimony of David Steer, (an orthodox witness,) p. 66. 
 
 2 Testimony of Peter Askew, p. 56, and of Doct. Carrol, p. 117. 
 8 Testimony of Elisha Bates, p. 20. 
 
296 SEPARATION IN OHIO. 
 
 Hicks, and presented him a paper, the purport of 
 which was, an enumeration of charges of unsound 
 ministry, as originally preferred against him hy Pine 
 Street Meeting, Philadelphia, and thence forwarded 
 to their Orthodox hrethren on Long Island, styling 
 themselves the Monthly Meeting of Westbury and 
 Jericho. Elias Hicks had with him a minute of con- 
 currence from the Monthly Meeting of Jericho, in- 
 dorsed by "Westbury Quarterly Meeting, and when 
 he left home, no such monthly meeting as West- 
 bury and Jericho was known to exist. It appears 
 that three adult male members and about the same 
 number of females withdrew from Jericho Monthly 
 Meeting, and joining themselves with about double 
 their number from Westbury Monthly Meeting, set 
 up a new monthly meeting, which they called West- 
 bury and Jericho. 1 This small body undertook to 
 sit in judgment on the religious character of Elias 
 Hicks, and after he bad departed on his journey to 
 Ohio, they issued a mandate for his recall. He of 
 course disregarded this unwarrantable proceeding. 
 
 When the hour arrived, on Seventh-day mornii 
 for the Meeting of Ministers and Elders to convene, 
 "it was found that the Orthodox had principally 
 taken their seats, and that guards were stationed at 
 the gate to prevent Friends from entering: and they 
 accordingly, in a quiet and unobtrusive manner, after 
 procuring seats, sat down and proceeded with their 
 meeting in the open air." 2 
 
 On First-day morning, a large congregation was 
 
 1 Westbury Meeting had 3 U Friends and 39 Orthodox ; Jerioho 
 Meeting had 211 Friends, 9 Orthodox, and 3 Neutrals. Sec In- 
 hibit X, Foster's Report, Vol. II. p. 464. 
 
 8 Statement of M. T. C. Gould, Friend or Adv. of Truth, I. 251. 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 297 
 
 assembled for divine worship at the yearly meeting- 
 house. Elias Hicks delivered a discourse, "which 
 was deemed by those not avowedly opposed to him, 
 quite unexceptionable." The moment he was seated, 
 Elisha Bates rose, and made a speech in which he 
 asserted that Elias "had not only obtained his certifi- 
 cates to travel, by improper means, but was now for- 
 mally and officially recalled by his own Monthly Meet- 
 ing, a copy of the official papers being served on him 
 only the day previous." 1 This false statement uttered 
 in the presence of a large audience, most of whom 
 knew nothing of the circumstances, will enable us to 
 decide how much reliance may be placed on the 
 other statements of Elisha Bates. It is not surpris- 
 ing that he was unwilling for the people to hear 
 Elias Hicks when he rose to reply, and that he joined 
 with others in breaking the meeting while Elias was 
 standing. 
 
 It appears by the statement of M. T. C. Gould, 
 the stenographer, that when T. Shillitoe and Anna 
 Braithwait had shaken hands, the people seemed dis- 
 posed to remain and hear Elias Hicks, — and that 
 Elisha Bates in a loud and authoritative manner re- 
 quested them to withdraw immediately, so that the 
 caretakers might close the house. In order to end 
 the confusion that ensued, Elias shook hands with 
 those near him and walked out, the great body of 
 the meeting following his example. Some young 
 men that remained were told, by a lawyer employed 
 for the occasion, that they would subject themselves 
 to severe penalties if they did not retire. 2 
 
 1 Statement of M. T. C. Gould, Friend or Adv. of Truth, I. 251. 
 ■ Ibid. 252. 
 
 202 
 
298 SEPAKATION IN OHIO. 
 
 On First-day afternoon, Elislia Dawson delivered a 
 brief discourse. Soon after him, Amos Peaslee rose 
 and spoke "in a very feeling manner," but several 
 ministers in the gallery whispered together, and at 
 length Jonathan Taylor requested him to take his 
 seat. He paused during the interruption, and then 
 continued his discourse. 
 
 In a short time, Elisha Bates rose, and in a loud 
 voice exclaimed, "Amos Peaslee, wilt thou please to 
 take thy seat. Thou art an intruder, and hast no 
 right to be in this house." Immediately there was a 
 cry from many voices, "Elisha Bates, sit down!" 
 Great confusion ensued, and many rose to their 
 feet. After a pause, Amos said to the people, "By 
 the mercy of God, I beseech you to be still." The 
 meeting became quiet, and he concluded his dis- 
 course without further interruption. 1 
 
 Amos Peaslee was then travelling as an approved 
 minister, with a certificate from "Woodbury Monthly 
 Meeting, New Jersey. That meeting, however, had 
 been divided before the certificate was granted ; a 
 small minority of its members, being orthodox, had 
 withdrawn to hold a separate meeting. 2 
 
 At 10 o'clock, on Second-day, the 8th of Ninth 
 month, the Yearly Meeting assembled. The gallery 
 seats were filled, mostly with orthodox Friends, be- 
 fore the hour appointed; there were many guards at 
 the doors, and a crowd of people in the yard stand- 
 ing in the rain. Some of them were Friends of the 
 class intended to be excluded ; others were not mem- 
 
 i 'i 
 
 Testimony of David Scholfield, p. 130; Richard Barnard, p. 97, 
 and J. Updegraff, p. 136. 
 
 2 Testimony of Richard Barnard, 99. 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 299 
 
 bers, but were drawn by curiosity to witness the 
 expected collision. 
 
 Elias Hicks did not attend that day. 1 
 
 When Amos Peaslee and Elisha Dawson came to 
 the door, the guards objected to their entering, and 
 they halted. A dense crowd soon gathered behind 
 them, pressing forward. Amos said, " Dear friends, 
 don't push, be peaceable ; if we are not admitted, 
 we can't help it. If we can go in peaceably, well; if 
 not, we will go away." The pressure from without 
 continued to increase; there was no way of escape for 
 those at the door; the guards at length gave way, and 
 the crowd rushed in, carrying the Friends with them. 3 
 
 Before the meeting proceeded to business, Israel 
 French, a Friend in good standing, rose and said, 
 that u a painful duty devolved upon him, to object to 
 the clerks at the table ; that their conduct since last 
 year had been such as, in his opinion, had disquali- 
 fied them for serving the meeting acceptably." 3 
 There was immediately a large expression of unity 
 with this declaration ; but some objected, saying it 
 was disorderly. 
 
 Jonathan Taylor, the clerk appointed the year pre- 
 vious, was at the table, as usual, and read a minute he 
 had prepared for opening the meeting. The names 
 of the representatives were called, all of whom, except 
 five, answered; the number present exceeding fifty. 
 It is to be understood that these were the representa- 
 tives of the orthodox section of four Quarterly meet- 
 ings, and about half of those from Redstone. 
 
 William B. Irish proposed the name of David 
 Hilles, of Redstone Quarter, for clerk, which was con- 
 
 1 See his Journal, p. 413. 2 Test, of Levi Pickering, p. 124. 
 8 Testimony of Israel French, p. 173. 
 
300 SEPARATION IN OHIO. 
 
 curred in by a large number of voices in rapid succes- 
 sion ; others objected ; but the advocates of a change 
 of clerks called to Hilles to come forward to the table. 
 The aisle was crowded, and the gallery-steps leading 
 to the table were occupied by a dense mass of ortho- 
 dox Friends. Hilles was urged forward through the 
 crowd, until he reached the stove near the centre of 
 the aisle, where he wrote an opening minute ; but the 
 young men of his party insisted that he should go to 
 the table, and they undertook to open the way. No 
 blows were given, but there was much pushing and 
 crowding. At this juncture a cry was raised that the 
 gallery over the minister's seat was falling. Although 
 a false alarm, it caused a rush to the doors and win- 
 dows, and many left the house. There was a suspen* 
 sion of the contest, but it was soon renewed, and the 
 clerk's table, being held by one party and seized by 
 the other, was broken to pieces. 
 
 Jonathan Taylor, being pressed between the table 
 and door, was considerably injured, though uninten- 
 tionally. Benjamin W. Ladd, a prominent member 
 of the orthodox party, moved an adjournment to the 
 next day, and proposed submitting the question to 
 the representatives, whose names were accordingly 
 called, and they nearly all answered in the affirmative. 
 The orthodox members then withdrew, being about 
 half the meeting, or, according to their estimate, more 
 than half. 1 
 
 The Friends who remained recognized David Hilles 
 as clerk for the day. They had reports from their 
 section of four Quarterly meetings, and from the un- 
 
 1 Testimony of E. Bates, Jona. Taylor, B. W. Ladd, Rich. Bar- 
 nard, Doct. Carral, Levi Pickering, and others. Gould's Report 
 of Trial, Phila. ed. 1829. 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 301 
 
 divided meeting of Redstone. After calling the 
 names of the representatives, they proceeded to 
 business. 
 
 The women's meeting separated at the same time, 
 but with less disorder. 
 
 On Third-day morning, those who had retained 
 possession of the house again assembled in it, and 
 the representatives having conferred together, pro- 
 posed David Hilles for clerk and Jehu Lewis for 
 assistant, who were then regularly appointed by the 
 meeting. The orthodox section of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, having assembled in the yard, sent Elisha Bates 
 and others as a deputation to demand the occupancy 
 of the house for Ohio Yearly Meeting. They were 
 told, in reply, that Ohio Yearly Meeting was then in 
 session, and they might come in and take their seats. 
 They required an explicit answer, and Friends in the 
 house tendered them the following proposition, viz. : 
 
 "To the party of Friends called Orthodox, styling them- 
 selves the Yearly Meeting of Ohio. 
 
 "Dear Friends, — We, the committee appointed 
 by Ohio Yearly Meeting of Friends, held at Mount 
 Pleasant, on the 8th day of the 9th month, 1828, by 
 authority of said Yearly Meeting, agree to propose to 
 you that an equitable division of the property belong- 
 ing to the Yearly Meeting be made, either by dividing 
 the time, so that the meeting-house shall accommo- 
 date both parties, or that a fair estimate of the value 
 of the property be made, and that the party holding 
 the meeting-house pay to the other party an equiva- 
 lent for the relinquishment of the right to their part, 
 agreeably to the numbers of the relative parties; and 
 if you accede to this proposal, it is further proposed, 
 
 26 
 
302 SEPARATION IN OHIO. 
 
 that you appoint a like committee to enter into an 
 amicable arrangement with us to effect the said ob- 
 ject, and notify us thereof. Signed by direction and 
 on behalf of the committee. 
 
 "Mount Pleasant, 9th day of 9th mo., 1828. 
 
 Joseph John, 
 Samuel Jones, 
 James Belangee, 
 Joseph Mills." 
 
 This document was read twice to Elisha Bates, the 
 official organ of the Orthodox party, and a copy ten- 
 dered to him, but he immediately withdrew with the 
 other members of the deputation. 1 
 
 The Orthodox Yearly Meeting was then opened in 
 the meeting-house yard ; the representatives nomi- 
 nated Elisha Bates for clerk, who was accordingly 
 appointed, and the meeting adjourned to Short 
 Creek meeting-house, where it continued to hold its 
 sittings. 2 
 
 The legal measures adopted by the orthodox party 
 during the week of the Yearly Meeting were most 
 extraordinary for a people professing to hold the prin- 
 ciples of Friends. On Second-day morning, at an 
 early hour, Elisha Bates stated that they were in pos- 
 session of the property, and that civil officers would 
 be in attendance to protect them. Soon after this, 
 notices were served on a number of Friends from other 
 yearly meetings, among whom was Jesse Merrit, the 
 travelling companion of Elias Hicks, to prohibit them 
 
 1 Statement of M. T. C. Gould, Friend or Adv. of Truth, I. 
 p. 258. 
 
 2 Tostimony of D. Seholfield, p. 130 ; Wm. Sharon, p. 123 ; E. 
 Bates, p. 1G. 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 303 
 
 from entering the meeting-house during the session 
 of Ohio Yearly Meeting, and to forewarn them that 
 if they intruded, the trustees would seek their remedy 
 by appeal to the legal tribunals of the State of Ohio. 1 
 
 On Third-day afternoon, the sheriff served a pro- 
 cess on James Tolerton, Halliday Jackson, and Nathan 
 Galbraith, requiring their appearance before the court 
 then in session at Steubenville, the next morning at 
 ten o'clock, it being a distance of twenty-one miles. 
 One of them attended accordingly, and found the writ 
 had not been returned. 
 
 On Fourth-day morning, two deputy sheriffs and a 
 constable arrived from Steubenville, and in the course 
 of the day served writs on about a dozen individuals, 
 among whom was David Hilles, clerk of the Yearly 
 Meeting. The next day he, with other defendants 
 and witnesses, proceeded to Steubenville, appeared 
 before the court, and succeeded in obtaining a post- 
 ponement of the hearing until the 15th of 10th month. 
 "Among the thirty orthodox Friends who appeared 
 at Steubenville, on the part of the prosecution, were 
 Elisha Bates and Jonathan Taylor, of Mount Pleasant, 
 and a number of distinguished individuals from Phila- 
 delphia, JSTew England, and beyond the Atlantic." 2 
 It appears that these high-professors of religion left 
 their own Yearly Meeting to appear as prosecutors 
 and witnesses against their brethren, in violation of 
 the discipline, for at that time David Hilles, who was 
 one of the representatives from Redstone Quarterly 
 Meeting, had not been disowned by the Orthodox, 
 
 1 See copy of Notice* in The Friend or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. 
 p 254. 
 * Narrative of M. T. C. Gould, Fd. or Adv. of Truth, I. 260. 
 
304 SEPARATION" IN" OHIO. 
 
 and according to their own theory was a member of 
 the Society. 
 
 Jonathan Taylor, in his testimony before the court, 
 admitted that "David Hilles was a regular member 
 of the Society at the time this suit was brought," 
 and said, "he believed the discipline provided that 
 members should not sue one another and go to law." 1 
 
 The trial at Steuoenville came on the 15th of 10th 
 month, and the examination of witnesses continued 
 about a week. The defendants, David Hilles and 
 Isaac James, were prosecuted on the complaint of 
 Benjamin W. Ladd for disturbing the Ohio Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends, under a statute for the punish- 
 ment of disturbers of religious meetings. In addi- 
 tion to the State's attorney, the prosecutors had em- 
 ployed seven lawyers, and the defendants had four. 
 The material facts of the case have been stated in 
 this narrative, as related in the report of the stenog- 
 rapher who attended the trial. 
 
 Judge Hallock, after reviewing the evidence, says : 
 "It is to be observed that not all the 'Orthodox' or 
 'Hicksites' took part in this violence. Probably 
 much the greater part of both parties were inactive 
 spectators." — "The proposition to elect a clerk was 
 not in order, being before the meeting was open and 
 ready to proceed to business, — and unprecedented, at 
 any rate, in any body whose proceedings would have 
 the authority of precedent for that meeting." * * * * 
 He then concludes that the proceedings by a part of 
 the meeting "to expel Taylor and put Hilles in his 
 place were not warranted ; and that the use of force 
 was a disturbance of the meeting, and therefore a 
 
 1 Gould's Report of Trial, p. 181 
 
SEPARATION IN OHIO. 305 
 
 violation of the law of the land." He gave judg- 
 ment that each of the defendants should pay a fine 
 of five dollars. 1 The Orthodox party were not sat- 
 isfied with one suit at la^, but about the same time, 
 and through the same agent, Benjamin W. Ladd, in- 
 stituted a prosecution against Jonathan Pierce, Israel 
 French, and other Friends, for "assembling with in- 
 tent to commit a riot and proceeding to commit the 
 same." It was founded on the same facts as the suit 
 against Ililles and James, and was tried in the court 
 of common pleas at Steubenville in the Spring of 
 1829. The court decided that the defendants should 
 be imprisoned in the jail of the county for thirty 
 minutes, and should each pay a fine of'six and a 
 quarter cents. 
 
 The defendants cheerfully submitted to their brief 
 incarceration ; but, on the fine and costs, appealed to 
 the Supreme Court of Ohio. In the Tenth month 
 of the same year, the judgment of the inferior court 
 was reversed and the costs of the prosecution thrown 
 upon Benjamin W. Ladd, the agent of the Orthodox 
 party. The Judge said, " it was the verdict of the 
 jury that they had not found the defendants guilty 
 of a riot, and the court (of common pleas) ought to 
 have held it for naught and discharged them." 2 
 
 On reviewing the deplorable scenes that attended 
 the separation of Friends in Ohio, the impartial in- 
 quirer will be constrained to admit that both parties 
 were obnoxious to censure. There was however this 
 difference : the Orthodox party were the aggressors 
 by resorting to physical force to exclude from the 
 
 1 M. T. C. Gould's Report of Trial. 
 
 2 The Friend or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. 261 ; and Vol. II. pp. 166 
 and 360. 
 
 26* 2P 
 
306 SEPAKATION IN INDIANA. 
 
 meeting-house Friends who had as good a right to 
 enter as themselves ; — this they did by previous con- 
 cert, and with a deliberate purpose. The Friends, 
 whom they attempted to exclude, generally went to 
 the meeting intending "to be pacific," in accordance 
 with the advice of their elder brethren. 1 The con- 
 duct of some of them, after entering the house, was 
 very reprehensible, but it appears they were mostly 
 young men, actuated by a sudden impulse of party 
 zeal. After obtaining possession, the Friends evinced 
 their sense of justice by offering to make an equitable 
 division of the property ; while the Orthodox party 
 manifested their intolerant spirit, by harassing their 
 brethren with vexatious lawsuits, thus violating the 
 discipline they pretended to uphold. 
 
 The relative numbers of the two sections through- 
 out the Yearly Meeting of Ohio were supposed to be 
 nearly equal, but so far as known to the author, no 
 census was taken. 
 
 In Indiana Yearly Meeting, the separation was con- 
 ducted in a manner somewhat similar to that pur- 
 sued in Philadelphia. At the Yearly Meeting held 
 at Richmond, Indiana, in 1827, a large number of 
 strangers were present, among whom were two 
 English Friends and Elisha Bates, with others from 
 Ohio. A document called a "Testimony and Epistle 
 of Advice," was .introduced from the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, and though much objected to, was adopted, 
 through the preponderating influence of the orthodox 
 party. This being sent down to the subordinate 
 meetings, caused much dissatisfaction in some places. 
 
 1 Testimony of Israel Updegraff, p. 150. 
 
SEPARATION IN INDIANA. 307 
 
 In the Fifth month, 1828, it was rejected by Miami 
 Quarterly Meeting and denied a place on their min- 
 utes. In the Eighth month, another effort was made 
 at that Quarter to obtain its acceptance, but without 
 effect. Amos Peaslee and Elisha Dawson being in 
 attendance, the orthodox party objected to any busi- 
 ness being transacted while they were present, and 
 having the clerk on their side, many hours were 
 spent in fruitless debate. At length a committee, 
 that had been appointed at a previous Quarterly 
 meeting to nominate a clerk, brought forward the 
 name of one, whom the great body of the meeting 
 agreed to appoint, and then the orthodox party with- 
 drew, leaving the greater number in possession of the 
 house. 
 
 The Friends who remained, taking into considera- 
 tion the discord that had been manifested in their 
 meeting and many others for some time past, and 
 being convinced that they could not enjoy their re- 
 ligious rights while connected with the opposite party, 
 concluded it would be right to take measures for re- 
 organizing the Yearly Meeting, " on the ancient foun- 
 dation and principles of the Society, and in accord- 
 ance with their present discipline for the Friends of 
 Indiana, Illinois, and the western and middle parts 
 of the State of Ohio." Members of the Quarterly 
 and Monthly meetings within those limits, who were 
 prepared to unite with this proposition, were invited 
 to meet at Miami, (Waynesville,) the last Second day 
 of the Ninth month, and the ministers and elders on 
 the Seventh day preceding. 
 
 In pursuance of this proposition, a Yearly meeting 
 was held, said to be attended by between six and 
 seven hundred Friends including both sexes, and 
 
308 SEPARATION iN BALTIMORE. 
 
 representatives with reports from four Quarterly meet- 
 ings, where a division had taken place, were in at- 
 tendance. 1 
 
 The Yearly Meeting was harmonious and satis- 
 factory. It was subsequently held alternately at 
 Waynesville, Ohio, and Richmond, Ind., and being 
 recognized by the Yearly meetings of Philadelphia, 
 K'ew York, Baltimore, and Ohio, has continued to 
 correspond with them. The number of its members 
 is much smaller than those constituting the Orthodox 
 Yearly Meeting of Indiana. 
 
 At the Yearly Meeting eld in Baltimore for the 
 Western Shore of Maryland and the adjacent parts 
 of Pennsylvania and Virginia, from the 27th to the 
 31st of the Tenth month, 1828, the meeting was 
 opened as usual on Second-day morning. After the 
 certificates of Friends in attendance from other 
 Yearly meetings had been read, and a committee 
 appointed to prepare indorsements for them, the as- 
 sistant clerk informed the meeting that there were a 
 number of epistles and other documents on the table, 
 with the nature of which they were unacquainted, 
 and he proposed, for the purpose of preventing de- 
 bate, that they should be referred to the representa- 
 tives, for them to inspect, and say whether any or all 
 of them should be read in the meeting. This propo- 
 sition was united with generally, and adopted. 
 
 On the afternoon of the same day, George Jones, a 
 minister from England, endeavored, without success, 
 to effect a separation. 2 He objected to the course 
 
 1 The Friend or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. pp. 88, 98, and Vol. II. 
 pp. 137 to 140. 
 
 2 Testimony of Halliday Jackson, Foster's Report, Vol. II. p. 70. 
 
SEPARATION IN BALTIMORE. 309 
 
 pursued in referring the epistle to the representatives 
 for examination, and to accepting the certificates of 
 Friends in attendance from Yearly meetings; which, 
 he alleged, had departed from the principles of 
 Friends. He concluded his remarks in these words : 
 "As my mind is thoroughly sensible of the truth, 
 that this meeting has departed from the ancient doc- 
 trines of the Society, I cannot consider it right to be 
 one with you in a meeting that has departed from 
 the meetings of Friends, or one that will thus disown 
 the order that has been maintained by the Society. 
 Therefore I must leave the meeting, and leave you 
 to such choice as you have made." 1 
 
 As he pronounced the last few words, he descended 
 from the minister's gallery and left the house, but, 
 w r ith one exception, his orthodox brethren were not 
 then prepared to follow him. 
 
 On Third-clay morning, the Answers to the Queries 
 were read, and some edifying counsel handed forth. 
 In the afternoon, the representatives produced an 
 epistle addressed to all the Yearly meetings of 
 Friends, which w^as discussed during the remainder 
 of the sitting, but not adopted by the meeting. 
 
 On Fourth-day morning, the representatives re- 
 ported in favor of reading all the epistles that had 
 been received. They were read accordingly. The 
 epistle from London, and those from the Orthodox 
 Yearly meetings of Ohio and Virginia, were regarded 
 by many as uncharitable and disrespectful. Those 
 from the reorganized Yearly meetings of Philadelphia 
 and Indiana, and from the larger body in New York, 
 
 1 Reported by a stenographer ; see Friend or Adv. of Truth, 
 Vol. II. 92. 
 
 2P2 
 
310 
 
 SEPARATION IN BALTIMORE. 
 
 were affectionate and satisfactory. It was stated that 
 a similar epistle from Friends in Ohio had been writ- 
 ten, but was not received. John Jewett, in some 
 impressive remarks, showed that the Yearly Meeting 
 must define its position, inasmuch as the Friends 
 with whom we had corresponded in Philadelphia 
 were, m some of the epistles, called Separatists, and 
 charged with insubordination. He had attended 
 their meeting, and was prepared to say they were 
 the great body of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting and 
 the charges laid against them of disbelieving the 
 Scriptures and denying the divinity of Christ were 
 utterly false. 
 
 e Edward Stabler and Thomas Wetherald concurred 
 in these views. "They are," said the latter, -our 
 brethren m suffering — in doctrine, and in the fel- 
 lowship of the everlasting truth, and are equally with 
 ourselves alluded to in the false declarations which 
 one of these epistles contains. For they are false 
 and uncharitable assertions. We have not denied 
 the Scriptures; we have not denied the divinity of 
 Christ; we have not denied the fundamental princi- 
 ples of our Society. We highly esteem them,_and 
 I am willing to suffer for them, even to the laying 
 down of my natural life; but I am not willing to 
 commute the independence of this Yearly Meeting 
 nor to crouch to any associations of men." * * * * He 
 concluded his remarks as follows: «I am willing now 
 to return to the first proposition, whether the epistle 
 from Friends of Philadelphia shall be received and 
 whether we can acknowledge them as our brethren 
 or not ? For my part, I can." 
 
 "A very general expression of unity with Friends 
 of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, and in favor of an- 
 
SEPARATION IN BALTIMORE. 311 
 
 *>> 
 
 swering their epistle, now took place. A commit- 
 tee was accordingly appointed to answer the three 
 friendly epistles, viz., those from Philadelphia, Indi- 
 ana, and New York ; and the clerks were directed to 
 prepare a suitable minute expressive of the judgment 
 of the meeting." 1 
 
 On Fourth-day afternoon, Edward Stabler proposed 
 that the epistle produced by the representatives at a 
 former sitting should be again referred to them, with 
 instructions to alter or amend it as they might see 
 proper. After some discussion, the proposition was 
 agreed to. It was then concluded to adjourn to the 
 next morning, but before the minute to tbat effect 
 was read, James Gillingham rose and said it was 
 now obvious that this meeting had separated itself 
 from the Society of Friends, and he proposed that 
 all who were in favor of holding Baltimore Yearly 
 Meeting on its original foundation, should meet the 
 next morning at 9 o'clock, at the McKendrean school- 
 house. Hugh Balclerston concurred in the proposi- 
 tion, and advised all who were in favor of it to keep 
 their seats till the close of the meeting, to prevent 
 any disorder. At the close of the sitting, these two 
 individuals went into the women's meeting, which 
 was still in session, to notify them in like manner. 
 
 On Fifth-day morning, the meeting assembled, and 
 proved to be large. Only two representatives, out 
 of fifty-three, were missing, and the largest estimated 
 number of the orthodox who had withdrawn was 
 one hundred and thirty-five, including both sexes. 2 
 
 1 Stenographer's Report, Friend or Advocate of Truth, Vol. II. 
 pp. 110, 112. 
 
 2 Test, cf Halliday Jackson, Foster's Report, II. 70. 
 
312 SEPARATION IN BALTIMORE. 
 
 Amons: these were some whose absence was mourned 
 by many. The honorable conduct of the orthodox 
 brethren in retiring without making confusion, was 
 commended by Thomas Wetherald. He considered 
 their withdrawal, with the avowed intention of set- 
 ting up another meeting, a relinquishment of their 
 rights of membership ; and having seen the bad ef- 
 fects of disoicnments in other Yearly meetings, he 
 thought some step ought to be taken to avoid the 
 unpleasant consequences which had resulted from 
 this mode of procedure. 1 
 
 This suggestion was adopted by the meeting, and 
 a minute to that effect was made; stating moreover, 
 that "such persons cannot be again restored without 
 making application to the Monthly Meeting within 
 the limits of which they reside, requesting to be re- 
 instated in their rights of membership." It may be 
 added, that in such cases of restoration, no acknowl- 
 edgments are required* 
 
 The Yearly Meeting was continued by adjourn- 
 ments until Sixth-day afternoon. The representa- 
 tives again produced the epistle divested of its 
 objectionable passages, and after some further 
 amendments, it was adopted and addressed, "To 
 the Quarterly. Monthly, and Preparative Meetings, 
 which constitute this Yearly Meeting, and to our 
 members individually." In this document the fol- 
 lowing passage occurs. "Divers charges have been 
 circulated against us: such as that we contemn the 
 authority of the Scriptures, and deny the divinity of 
 our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Which charges, 
 
 1 The Friend or Adv. of Truth, Vol. II. p. 191. 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 313 
 
 however strenuously urged, and however often reit- 
 erated, are nevertheless unfounded." 
 
 In accordance with a proposition brought up from 
 Fairfax Quarterly Meeting, a rule of discipline was 
 adopted, that elders should be appointed by the 
 Monthly meetings at least once in three years, and 
 members of the Meeting for Sufferings by the Yearly 
 Meeting annually. 
 
 The separation did not extend to the Yearly meet- 
 ings of Kew England, ^North Carolina, and Virginia, 
 which are of the class called Orthodox. The Yearly 
 Meeting of Virginia, being verv small, has since been 
 discontinued, and the Yearly Meeting of New Eng- 
 land has been divided by the secession of those called 
 "Wilburites. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 At the time of the separation, the Society of Friends 
 in America was in possession of a large amount of 
 real and personal estate, generally held in trust for 
 religious and educational purposes. . It became a 
 question of deep importance, how and by whom this 
 property should be held, and unhappily it proved to 
 be, in some of the States, a subject of litigation. 
 
 The following remarks by a distinguished member 
 of the bar in Philadelphia are deemed appropriate. 
 "If Friends could have come to an amicable and equi- 
 table division of property, they would have set an ex- 
 ample to the world of more value than the property 
 to be thereby sacrificed, fitting to be recorded with 
 IV — 27 
 
314 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 the "history of their leading and glorious triumphs of 
 principle, when they treated with and paid the In- 
 dians for lands that by chartered right were already 
 the Proprietary's; when as pioneers they secured 
 religious toleration ; and when, obedient to the calls 
 of humanity, they enfranchised their slaves, and zeal- 
 ously co-operated for the abolition of the slave-trade. 
 
 " In scriptural authority, they had before them the 
 beautiful and persuasive example of Abraham and Lot, 
 — each willing to yield to the other the right to take 
 to the right or to the left, for the enjoyment of what 
 a bountiful Providence had amply supplied for their 
 flocks and herds, and their households and people. 
 
 "In respect to the legal right so to have adjusted 
 the rights of property, when it is considered that it is 
 a cherished principle of our jurisprudence to favour 
 amicable settlements, and that family compacts made 
 for the determination of controversy, are upheld as of 
 sacred obligation, because they avert litigation and 
 preserve peace, it could hardly be doubted that the 
 tribunals of justice would meet in the same spirit and 
 most willingly affirm the amicable treaties of divided 
 religious associations. Can this be questioned when 
 the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has reiterated the 
 recommendation that the litigant members of a di- 
 vided religious society should ' part in peace, having 
 settled their claims to the property on the basis of 
 mutual and liberal concession,' and expressed the 
 confident trust that even in the contingency of revo- 
 lution, 'to the justice and forbearance of the majority 
 of the association, whose very object is to deal justly, 
 love mercy, and walk humbly, the minority cannot 
 appeal in vain'? 1 W. and S., 40." ' 
 
 1 Memoir of Philip and Kachel Price, p. 123. 
 
THE BURIAL-GROUNDS. 315 
 
 Friends composing the Yearly meetings of Phila- 
 delphia, New York, and Ohio acted upon the princi- 
 ples established in their rules of discipline, and pro- 
 posed to their Orthodox brethren an equitable division 
 of the property in proportion to their respective num- 
 bers; but these offers were generally declined, and 
 suits at law were instituted by the Orthodox, discredit- 
 able to themselves, and oppressive to their brethren. 
 
 In most of the country meetings belonging to Phila- 
 delphia Yearly Meeting, the Orthodox party being a 
 small minority, withdrew and left Friends in posses- 
 sion of the meeting-houses: but the burial-grounds 
 continued to be used in common without either party 
 attempting to exclude the others, or interfere with 
 their arrangements in the interment of their dead. 
 
 In the city of Philadelphia, the five Monthly meet- 
 ings, viz., the Northern District, the Southern Dis- 
 trict, the Middle District, the Western District, and 
 Green Street Monthly Meeting, purchased, in the 
 year 1818, a lot on Schuylkill 7th and Mulberry 
 streets, for the use of all these meetings, and it was for 
 that purpose vested in fifteen trustees, three of whom 
 were appointed by each Monthly meeting. Subse- 
 quently this lot was designated as a burial-place for 
 the common use of the five Monthly meetings. In order 
 to the preservation and regulation of this cemetery, 
 two persons were appointed by each Monthly meet- 
 iug, forming a committee of ten. 
 
 In addition to this general committee, each Monthly 
 meeting appointed a burial committee, under whose 
 orders the bodies of deceased Friends w^ere interred 
 in the Western Burial Ground. Under this arrange- 
 ment the five Monthly meetings enjoyed the common 
 use of the property in harmony for some years. 
 
316 THE BURIAL-GKOUNDS. 
 
 But after the alleged laving down of Green Street 
 Monthly Meeting by the Orthodox section of Phila- 
 delphia Quarter, as already related, the two members 
 of the committee of ten appointed by Green Street 
 Meeting were not recognized by the other members 
 of that committee. Except in a few instances, the 
 orders for the interment of its deceased members, 
 given by their burial committee, were disregarded by 
 the superintendent of the burial-ground, acting under 
 the supposed authority of a majority of the committee 
 often; the gate was closed against approaching fu- 
 nerals of its late members, and in order to their inter- 
 ment, the Friends of Green Street found it necessary 
 to enter the enclosure by means of ladders, and force 
 the fastenings from the gate. 1 It is proper here to 
 remark, that this method of entering would not have 
 been necessary, had the members of Green Street 
 Meeting been willing to receive orders for the inter- 
 ment of their dead from the burial committee of the 
 Northern District, to which meeting they had, with- 
 out their consent, been professedly transferred by the 
 Orthodox section of Philadelphia Quarter. The Green 
 Street Friends could not, without a surrender of their 
 just rights, acknowledge in any way the laying down 
 of their meeting or the transfer of their membership; 
 for the congregation still remained almost entire, the 
 orthodox who had left it were so few as to make no 
 perceptible difference ; the Monthly Meeting was 
 recognized as a branch of Abington Quarter, the 
 same discipline was still administered, and the same 
 doctrines professed, as before the separation. 
 
 In order to obviate the necessity of breaking the 
 
 1 Opinion of Judge King, see Fd. or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. pp. 
 179 to 185. 
 
THE BURIAL-GROUNDS. 317 
 
 lock to gain admission for the interment of their dead, 
 Green Street Monthly Meeting, through its commit- 
 tee, made application to five of the trustees, in whom 
 the property was vested, and obtained from them per- 
 mission to put a gate in the Western wall of the 
 burial-ground, and to take any other measures that 
 might secure to the meeting the right of interment in 
 conformity with the deed of trust, recognizing a com- 
 mon right with the other Monthly meetings of Phila- 
 delphia, "it being understood that the Friends of all 
 the other Monthly meetings should enjoy the privi- 
 lege of entrance equally with the Friends of Green 
 Street." 1 
 
 In pursuance of this design, on the 31st of 5th 
 month, 1828, Edmund Shotwell, Joseph Lukens, and 
 Charles Middleton (members of Green Street Meet- 
 ing) proceeded, with the assistance of two colored 
 men, to put a gate in the wall of the burial-ground; 
 and were soon after summoned to appear before the 
 Mayor of the city, "to answer the commonwealth on 
 a charge founded on the affirmation and information 
 of Jeremiah Willets and others, with tumultuously 
 assembling and committing a breach of the public 
 peace, by forcibly pulling down a portion of the brick 
 wall around the Friends' (Western) burying-ground." 
 Jeremiah Willets was a member of the JSTorthern Dis- 
 trict Meeting, and it appeared that previous to enter- 
 ing his complaint, he had held a consultation with 
 some of the most prominent members of the Ortho- 
 dox party, at the office of their legal adviser, Horace 
 Binney. 
 
 The Mayor, when Shotwell and the other defend- 
 ants appeared before him, required them to enter 
 
 1 Opinion of Judge King. 
 27* IV — 2 Q 
 
318 THE BURIAL-GROUNDS. 
 
 into recognizance to keep the peace, although there 
 was no evidence of any violence having been com- 
 mitted or intended. The parties accused, being con- 
 scious that they had been in the quiet and peaceable 
 pursuit of their civil rights, and that the decision of 
 the Mayor was unjust, declined to enter into the re- 
 cognizance, and were committed to jail. After a 
 detention of five days in prison, they were brought, 
 by a writ of Habeas Corpus, before Judge King, and 
 a patient investigation of the case being made, he dis- 
 charged them. 1 
 
 The Orthodox leaders, being thus defeated in their 
 design, and bent upon litigation, instituted, in the 
 Seventh month 1828, an action for trespass against 
 the same defendants. 2 The suit was brought in the 
 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in the name of the 
 fifteen trustees in whom the title of the burying- 
 ground was vested for the use of the five Monthly 
 meetings ; but five of the trustees published a protest 
 against the use of their names as plaintiffs, declaring 
 that the suit was commenced without their knowl- 
 edge or consent, and " against the established order 
 and discipline of the Society of Friends." 
 
 The members of Green Street Monthly Meeting, 
 and Friends in connection with them throughout 
 the Society, were averse to litigation, and disposed 
 to make an amicable and equitable adjustment of 
 their claims in regard to property. This disposition 
 they had manifested on numerous occasions, and now, 
 being solicitous to avoid a lawsuit, they authorized 
 their counsel, C. J. Ingersoll, Thomas Kittera, and 
 Eli K. Price, to make an amicable overture to the 
 
 1 Opinion of Judge King. 2 Fd. or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. 205. 
 
PROPOSED AMICABLE ADJUSTMENT. 319 
 
 prosecutors. This was done accordingly, in a letter 
 addressed to the Counsel for the Plaintiffs, from which 
 the following passage is quoted : " Under existing 
 circumstances, divided as they are, it is not to be ex- 
 pected that they can meet together as formerly : and 
 the only hope of an ultimate union, is, to allow each 
 other, without interruption, to conduct their business 
 and their worship. In order to this, we submit, 
 without prejudice to our clients' rights in an}' event, 
 the following as a basis of accommodation, which we 
 trust will be found acceptable, and have no doubt 
 would be instantly acceded to by our clients : that a 
 fair and equitable apportionment of the real estate 
 and property, held by trustees for society purposes in 
 this district, be made between the two parties in pro- 
 portion to the numbers belonging to each, counting 
 all such as were acknowledged members at a period 
 anterior to the adoption of measures by one party 
 purporting to disown the members of the other ; say 
 the April Yearly Meeting of 1827. The discipline 
 of this Society, which enjoins the amicable adjust- 
 ment of these differences, seems to make settlement 
 peculiarly proper in this instance, and greatly desired 
 by the large party who have intrusted to us the man- 
 agement of their cause." 
 
 The counsel for the plaintiffs rejected this friendly 
 overture, and we may reasonably conclude they did 
 so under instructions from their clients. 
 
 Another proposition was then made by the defend- 
 ants, through their counsel, to this effect : That, in 
 order "to put a stop to the interruption of funerals 
 and laceration of feeling which occur whenever a 
 burial takes place, that the dead be interred in the 
 burial-grounds of the Society, by such persons as 
 
320 THE PROPOSAL EEJECTED. 
 
 may have the care of them, upon orders to be issued 
 in the same form and manner as was usual before the 
 dispute arose. This proposition we make without 
 prejudice to our clients' rights if not accepted, and 
 if acceded to, we agree on their behalf that the arrange- 
 ment shall be without prejudice to the asserted rights of 
 either party." 
 
 This reasonable and humane proposition was also 
 rejected by the inexorable prosecutors, who replied 
 through their counsel as follows: "As Green Street 
 Meeting is not now recognized as a Monthly Meeting 
 agreeable to the discipline and usages of the Society 
 of Friends, we are not authorized to say that orders 
 from that source will be received by those having the 
 care of the burial-grounds." 1 
 
 Soon after this suit was commenced, another was 
 instituted in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, by 
 the Orthodox party, having for its object the eject- 
 ment of Green Street Friends from their meeting- 
 house and lots. The prosecutors were certain pre- 
 tended trustees appointed by the Northern District 
 Monthly Meeting, and at their instigation the sher- 
 iffs went to Green Street meeting-house on the 17th 
 of the 7th month, 1828. and served the following 
 Friends with process as they came out of the meeting 
 held that day, to wit, Joseph Lukens, George AVool- 
 ley, Joseph Warner, Gabriel Middleton, and Edmund 
 Shotwell. 2 
 
 The two suits were continued on the docket of the 
 Supreme Court until the year 1831, when they were 
 withdrawn and the costs paid by the Orthodox prose- 
 cutors. 3 
 
 1 Fd. or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. p. 282. 
 See Fd. or Adv. of Truth, Vol. I. p. 231. 3 Ibid. Vol. IV. 175 
 
 2 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 321 
 
 We may safely infer what would have been the de- 
 cision of that court, from the judgment it gave in 
 the year 1829, in a cause at issue between the two 
 sections of the First Baptist Church of Philadelphia. 
 "By the majority of the court, the right of the mi- 
 nority of the congregation to have a charter under 
 the name of the First Baptist Church, was established ; 
 and at the same time an equal right on the part of a 
 majority to obtain a charter under the same name, 
 was admitted, and a charter for them was accordingly 
 submitted for the certificate of the judges. This de- 
 cision was made expressly on the ground that the 
 grant of a charter under the name of the First Bap- 
 tist Church, could in no respect affect the rights of 
 property. 
 
 "After the opinions were delivered, the Chief 
 Justice made some very just and forcible remarks to 
 the parties, earnestly recommending to them an ami- 
 cable adjustment of their differences in regard to prop- 
 erty. It was evident to him, as was usually the case 
 in these religious disputes, that it was a contest for 
 property carried on in an angry and bitter spirit un- 
 becoming the Christian character. The decision now 
 made would confer no rights of property. These 
 stand as they did before. What is the rule of justice 
 which should govern these parties is plain and pal- 
 pable to every person of any common sense. It is, 
 that the majority should continue to hold the property ; 
 but it is their duty to make compensation to the mi- 
 nority, in proportion to the respective numbers of the 
 parties. This minority have not been deprived of 
 their civil rights, by an expulsion from the church, 
 by a majority exercising an arbitrary power for party 
 purposes. If the majority do not do justice on this 
 
 2Q2 
 
322 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 plain principle of natural equity, the minority may 
 pursue their legal remedy, in which the charter will 
 only be a means of facility ; when it will probably 
 turn out, that they will be entitled to their propor- 
 tionate interest in the church property. An adjust- 
 ment on this principle should be made without fur- 
 ther litigation. The frequency of these religious 
 disputes is calculated, not only to lay waste the stand- 
 ing of the parties, but to cut to the very core the 
 cause of the common Master, whom all profess with 
 so much zeal to serve." 1 
 
 This opinion of the Chief Justice was equally appli- 
 cable to the case of the separation in Philadelphia 
 Yearly Meeting. "The majority," he says, "should 
 continue to hold the property, and make compensa- 
 tion to the minority in proportion to the respective 
 numbers of the parties." But the Orthodox section 
 refused to settle on this equitable principle, and not 
 content with holding the most valuable part of the 
 property, they — the minority of the Yearly Meeting — ■ 
 claimed the whole. 
 
 The course pursued by the Orthodox party in order to 
 obtain the entire control of the Asylum for the Insane 
 at Frankford demands our attention. This institution 
 was founded by members of the Society of Friends, 
 and, according to the provisions of its constitution, none 
 but members of this religious society were eligible to 
 office or even to membership in it. The estate of the 
 institution was held in trust by twelve members, and 
 the government of the Asylum was intrusted to twenty 
 managers, a treasurer, and a clerk, elected annually 
 from among the contributors. At the annual meet- 
 ing of the contributors, in the spring of 1828, it ap- 
 
 1 Fd. or Adv. of Truth, Vol. II. p. 128. 
 
MORE LITIGATION. 323 
 
 peared that the managers, a majority of whom were 
 orthodox, had excluded from the board two of their 
 members, Charles Townsend and Joseph Warner, 
 highly respectable Friends, on the ground that they 
 had been disowned by the Orthodox section of the 
 Society ; and the same party had brought forward the 
 names of seventy-six new contributors, in 6rder, by 
 their votes, to sanction the action of the managers, 
 and control the proceedings of the meeting. By this 
 means it was intended to exclude not only from the 
 control, but from the benefits of the institution, all 
 the contributors who did not belong to the Orthodox 
 section of the Society, and who had previously con- 
 stituted a majority of the association. The attempt, 
 as might have been expected, occasioned much ex- 
 citement, and the meeting was broken up in disorder. 1 
 But the Orthodox party persisted in their determina- 
 tion, and ultimately succeeded in depriving a large 
 proportion of the contributors and owners of the 
 property of their just rights, and to this day hold 
 exclusive possession of the institution. 
 
 In the Eleventh month, 1828, being a few months 
 subsequent to the institution of the two lawsuits in 
 Pennsylvania, the Orthodox party filed a bill in Chan- 
 cery in the State of New Jersey, which was under- 
 stood to be with a view to establish their claim to 
 the property of the Society of Friends in that State. 
 It will be remembered that the Yearly Meeting, which 
 assembled in Philadelphia, included within its limits, 
 before the separation, all the meetings of Friends in 
 New Jersey as well as most of those in Pennsylvania. 
 The leading members of the Orthodox party resided 
 
 1 Test, of II. Jackson, Foster's Report, II. 122-128 ; and Cock- 
 burn's Review, pp. 259-262. 
 
324 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 in Philadelphia, and they were regarded as the origi 
 nators of this lawsuit, although Joseph Hendrickson, 
 of New Jersey, was made the complainant. The 
 ostensible object of the suit was to obtain possession 
 of a school-fund belonging to Chesterfield Prepara- 
 tive Meeting, held at Crosswicks, Burlington County, 
 New Jersey. Of this fund the sum of 2000 dollars 
 was lent in the year 1821, by Jos. Hendrickson, treas- 
 urer of the Crosswicks school-fund, to Thos. L. Shot- 
 well, who thereupon gave his bond for the same, 
 secured by a morto-asre on real estate. 
 
 In the 12th month, 1827, a separation took place in 
 Chesterfield Preparative Meeting, when the orthodox 
 party, being about one third of the members, with- 
 drew to another house, and held a separate meeting. 
 Joseph Hendrickson, the treasurer of the school-fund, 
 being one of the minority that withdrew, the larger 
 body appointed, in the following month, Stacy Decow 
 as his successor, and directed him to call on Hendrick- 
 son for the moneys and bonds he held as treasurer of 
 the meeting. Hendrickson, being still recognized as 
 treasurer by the orthodox meeting, refused to give up 
 the funds, and demanded of Thos. L. Shotwell the 
 amount of his bond, which the latter declined to pay 
 until the rightful owner should be ascertained. 1 
 
 In the bill filed by Joseph Hendrickson, complain- 
 ant, against Thos. L. Shotwell, he avers, that the 
 orthodox party to which he belongs, beli'eve in the 
 Divinity and atonement of Christ and the authenticity 
 and divine authority of the Holy Scriptures, — doc- 
 trines that were held and considered fundamental by 
 the ancient Society of Friends. He says, " That the 
 
 1 Testimony of Saml. Craft and Josiah Gaskill, Foster's Rep., 
 Vol. I. 347, and Vol. II. p. 287. 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 325 
 
 principal difference between the people called Qua- 
 kers, and other Protestant trinitarian sects, in regard to 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, is, that the latter attach 
 the idea of individual personage to the three, as what 
 they consider a fair logical inference from the doctrines 
 expressly laid down in the Holy Scriptures. The peo- 
 ple called Quakers, on the other hand, considering it a 
 mystery beyond finite, human conception, take up the 
 doctrine as expressly laid down in the Scripture, and 
 have not considered themselves warranted in making 
 deductions, however specious." He alleges, more- 
 over, that the party which he calls Hicksites, do not 
 believe in these fundamental doctrines, and that they 
 have separated from the Society of Friends. They 
 "have seceded," he says, "not only from the faith, 
 but from the religious institutions and government 
 of the Society of Friends, and the ancient Yearly 
 Meeting of Philadelphia being continued by the Or- 
 thodox party aforesaid, they are identified with them 
 in regular and due succession." He contends that 
 the Orthodox Preparative Meeting at Crosswicks, to 
 which he belongs, being subordinate to the ancient 
 Yearly Meeting held at Arch Street, Philadelphia, is 
 the rightful owner of the school-fund in question ; 
 and he prays the court for a decree requiring Thos. 
 L. Shotwell to account to him for the amount of the 
 bond. 
 
 Stacy Decow, appointed treasurer of the school- 
 fund by the larger body of Friends at Crosswicks, 
 filed a bill in answer to the Orthodox claims, in which 
 he avers, that the Society of Friends, of which he is a 
 member, acknowledges no head but Christ, and no 
 principle of authority or government in the church 
 but the love and power of God, operating on the 
 
 28 
 
326 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 heart, and thence influencing the judgment, and pro- 
 ducing a unity of feeling, brotherly sympath}', and 
 condescension to each other. The great fundamental 
 principle of the Society — the divine light and power 
 operating on the soul — is acknowledged as the only 
 bond of union. Under this holy influence the Society 
 of Friends had been preserved in great harmony 
 until lately, when a few individuals, who had long 
 been continued in important stations, began to assume 
 and arrogate an authority over their brethren never 
 delegated to them : that they attempted to impose a 
 creed upon the Society, and their design being frus- 
 trated, they enlisted a party assuming the title of " the 
 Orthodox," and a line of discrimination was attempted 
 to be drawn in the meetings of Friends, in order to fill 
 every active station with those under their particular 
 influence. The discipline of the Society was, through 
 their means, violated or prostrated in order to screen 
 transgressors of their own party, or to procure the 
 disownment, upon vague and frivolous charges, of 
 those who resisted their spirit and measures. Thus 
 the} 7 continued to monopolize a power before unknown 
 to the Society, — tending to the subversion of indi- 
 vidual rights, — introducing great disorder and con- 
 fusion, and preventing the proper administration of 
 the discipline ; particularly in the city of Philadel- 
 phia, where their chief strength was found. 
 
 "These acts," he says, "were continued until the 
 Yearly Meeting of 1827, when their oppressive meas- 
 ures were pursued to such an extent, that it reduced 
 the great majority of the Society to the necessity of 
 submitting to their usurped domination, engaging in 
 a contest which would be productive of increased 
 disorder, or retiring from the said minority party, 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 327 
 
 and taking measures for the continuation and set- 
 tling the Yearly Meeting on its original principles. 
 The first course would have been a criminal aban- 
 donment of their rights and those of their poster- 
 ity, — the second would have been subversive of their 
 religious principles, — the third, however, was an in- 
 alienable right, guaranteed by the civil institutions of 
 the country, and consistent with the original ground 
 on which the Yearly Meeting was established. Thus 
 by the mutual agreement and consent of Monthly 
 and Quarterly meetings, the Yearly Meeting has 
 been continued, and is again settled on the principles 
 and according to the manner of its first institution, 
 comprising a very large majority of its former mem- 
 bers, — 'who are united in the same system of disci- 
 pline — maintaining the same testimonies, and hold- 
 ing the same religious faith as their forefather? and the 
 ancient Society of Friends did, — leaving to their own 
 course, undisturbed by them, those disorderly per- 
 sons who adopted an opposite and adverse Une of 
 procedure.' " 
 
 Stacy Decow, in his answer, disclaims, on behalf 
 of the Society to which he belongs, the name of 
 Hicksites, — a name never assumed nor acquiesced in 
 by them, — for they claim that only of Friends. They 
 " deny being the followers of any man or set oi men, 
 simply claiming to be the humble disciples and fol- 
 lowers of Christ, the great Head of the Church;" 
 and allege that they still hold and are endeavoring 
 to maintain and support the doctrines, fundamental 
 religious principles, discipline, and rules of govern- 
 ment of the ancient, religious Society of Friends. 
 He further insists that the rights of property are 
 sacred and inviolate, and cannot be taken from an 
 
828 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 individual or a religious association without their 
 consent, — and more especially that it cannot be 
 made to depend on the test of any religious creed, 
 framed after its vesting, and artfully prepared by a 
 minority to answer its purposes. 1 
 
 In a bill of Interpleader filed by Shotwell, in an- 
 swer to the allegations of Hendrickson and the Or- 
 thodox party, he says, " the Preparative Meeting of 
 Friends at Crosswicks claim to be at least two-thirds 
 of the original subscribers and contributors to the 
 said school-fund, and of their lawful representatives," 
 and a lawful majority of the Friends or people called 
 Quakers in the township of Chesterfield. Neverthe- 
 less, they have made overtures for an amicable ad- 
 justment in relation to property conformably to the 
 principles of justice and equity; "but the Orthodox 
 party have treated these offers with neglect, declaring 
 themselves alone to be the true Orthodox church in 
 which all the rights and property of the Society are 
 vested." 2 
 
 In pursuance of these "Pleadings in Chancery," a 
 great mass of testimony from witnesses of both par- 
 ties was taken and published in two octavo volumes, 
 by Jeremiah J. Foster, Master and Examiner in 
 Chancery. Frequent reference has been made to 
 this testimony in the preceding chapters, as furnish- 
 ing the best evidence we have in relation to the 
 causes and manner of the separation. 
 
 The testimony of the Orthodox witnesses, as well 
 as their bills in Chancery, dwelt much upon the doc- 
 trines they held, claiming, on that ground, that they 
 
 1 Decow's Answer to Bill of Interpleader, Foster's Report, Vol. 
 I. pp. 40 to 54. 
 
 2 Bill of Interpleader, Foster's Report, Vol. I. pp. 15, L.. 
 
THE PR0PEKTY QUESTION. 329 
 
 were the rightful successors of the Society of 
 Friends, and imputing to their opponents, repre- 
 sented by Stacy Decow, erroneous doctrines and vio- 
 lations of the rules of discipline. The witnesses ex- 
 amined on the part of Decow, the defendant, while 
 denying the charges made by the Orthodox, and as- 
 serting in general terms that they held the Christian 
 principles professed by the early Friends, refused 
 to answer interrogatories in relation to theological 
 questions or doctrinal points, which they considered 
 improper to be examined by a temporal tribunal. 1 
 In this course they were sustained by their counsel, 
 one of whom, Eli K. Price, objected to such ques- 
 tions. He said, in reference to the Society of 
 Friends, " It has never adopted a creed as the terms 
 of the communion of its members: therefore what 
 an individual under examination here might state to 
 be the doctrines of the Society, would only be his 
 own opinions of what they are, and not any conclu- 
 sive evidence upon the subject. And we have the 
 authority of the opposing witnesses, that the Society, 
 as a religious body, is not responsible for the writings 
 of its members, which have not been approved by a 
 meeting for sufferings. If the testimony of any wit- 
 ness could go for more than his own opinion, it 
 would be to establish for his brethren something in 
 the nature of a creed, which he has no authority to 
 do." 2 
 
 The decision of the Court of Chancery was in fa- 
 vor of Hendrickson and the Orthodox party. The 
 two judges, Ewing and Drake, pursuing different 
 lines of argument, arrived at the same conclusion. 
 
 1 Testimony of Abraham Lower, Foster's Report, I. 381. 
 a Foster's Report, I. p. 476. 
 28* 2R 
 
4 
 
 830 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 Chief Justice Ewing, after reviewing the evidence 
 in relation to the separation, concludes that the 
 Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia, which convened in 
 1827 and closed its session to meet again at the 
 usual time next year, was the true yearly meeting up 
 to the time of its adjournment. John Comly by con- 
 tinuing to act as assistant clerk recognized it as such, 
 and the Quarterly meetings recognized it also, by 
 paying their several quotas of the sum directed to be 
 raised to assist Friends in North Carolina. "The 
 Yearly Meeting," he says, "having convened and 
 closed in April, 1827, could not again convene, nor 
 could any body possessing its powers and authorities 
 convene until the same month of the succeeding 
 year 1828. The place of meeting was fixed by the 
 voice of the Yearly Meeting, which alone had the 
 authority in this respect, and alone could change it." 
 "There is no provision in the constitution for an 
 intermediate, or, as it is commonly denominated, 
 Special meeting, nor is authority given to the clerk, 
 to any portion of the members, or invested anywhere 
 else, to call such a meeting. Hence, it clearly fol- 
 lows, that, according to the constitution, the Yearly 
 Meeting could not again assemble until 1828." * * * * 
 For these and other reasons stated by the judge, he 
 concludes that the Yearly Meeting which assembled 
 at Arch Street house in 1828, was Philadelphia 
 Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends, and that 
 the Preparative Meeting of Chesterfield, connected 
 with and subordinate to it, was entitled to the school- 
 fund. He rejoiced that he was not constrained to 
 inquire into the charges of departure from the doc- 
 trines of Friends, so freely made against Green Street 
 Meeting, but maintained the right of the court to as- 
 
m 
 
 THE PKOPEKTY QUESTION. 331 
 
 certain, by competent evidence, what are the religious 
 principles of any man or set of men, when, as may 
 frequently be the case, civil rights are thereon to 
 depend, or thereby to be decided. 1 
 
 Associate Justice Drake, after alluding to the sepa- 
 ration in Chesterfield Preparative Meeting, and the 
 withdrawal of the orthodox minority, proceeds to 
 say, "If this Preparative Meeting were an independent 
 body, acting without the influence of any conventional 
 principle operating upon this point, the act of the 
 minority on this occasion would not affect the pow- 
 ers of the majority who remained in session, how- 
 ever it might expose itself and the members com- 
 posing it to disabilities. But the right to make 
 appointments, and to exercise the other functions of 
 the Preparative Meeting, would still continue with the 
 larger 'party. But the Preparative Meeting is not an 
 independent body, but a component part of the re- 
 ligious Society of Friends." The Preparative Meet- 
 ing being accountable to the Monthly ; the Monthly 
 to the Quarterly; and the Quarterly to the Yearly 
 Meeting; it becomes necessary to inquire which of 
 the two bodies claiming to be the Yearly Meeting 
 of Philadelphia, is legally entitled to the rights and 
 properties claimed by both. In conducting this in- 
 vestigation, the judge maintains that the court may 
 rightfully inquire into the badges of distinction by 
 which the Society of Friends are known ; and if they 
 are characterized by established doctrines, it may in- 
 quire what these are, and whether they belong to 
 one or both of these parties. He then proceeds to 
 review the evidence by which Hendrickson and the 
 
 1 See Opinion of Judge Ewing, Report of Trial, pp. 1 to 27. 
 
o 
 
 332 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 Orthodox party endeavored to prove their agreement 
 in doctrine with the founders of the Society, and 
 says this agreement had not been denied by the op- 
 posite party. "Decow," he says, "has introduced 
 several witnesses, who testify, and no doubt conscien- 
 tiously, that they believe they hold the ancient faith 
 of Friends, but they refuse to tell us what this faith 
 is, in reference to these enumerated doctrines. We 
 cannot give much w r eight to opinion, where we should 
 have facts. The belief should refer to specific doc- 
 trines, that the court may judge as well as the wit- 
 nesses, whether it was the ancient faith or not." 
 * * * * "The court will not force either party in 
 this cause to declare or prove their religious doc- 
 trines. But if doctrines be important, the party 
 which would avail themselves of their doctrines 
 must prove them. They are peculiarly within their 
 knowledge, and although they may have the right to 
 withhold them, yet if they do, they cannot expect suc- 
 cess to their cause. The money must be awarded to 
 the party which supports by proper proofs its preten- 
 sions to it. Under this view of the case, I deem it 
 unnecessary to attempt any further investigation of 
 the doctrines of the party called 'Hicksites.' And, 
 if ascertained, I certainly would not inquire, as an 
 officer of this court, whether the}' are right or wrong. 
 It is enough that it is not made to appear that they 
 correspond with the religious faith of the Society of 
 Friends." * * * * 
 
 "Without coming to any conclusion w T ith respect 
 to their doctrines, I am of opinion that this fund 
 should be awarded to that meeting which has shown, 
 at least to my satisfaction, that they agree in doctrine 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 333 
 
 with the Society of Friends, as it existed at the origin 
 of this trust." 1 
 
 The decision of the Court of Chancery not being 
 satisfactory to Stacy Decow and those whom he re- 
 presented, he appealed to the Governor and Council 
 sitting as a court of appeals at Trenton in the 7th 
 month, 1833. His appeal was sustained by the argu- 
 ments of his counsel Garret D. Wall and Samuel L. 
 Southard; while Hendrickson and the orthodox party 
 had for their counsel George Wood and Theodore Fre- 
 linghuysen. The importance of the cause, and the 
 high reputation of the counsel employed, attracted 
 great attention, and the sittings of the court were 
 attended by a large and intelligent audience deeply 
 interested in the result. 
 
 On the question being put, " Shall the decree of 
 the chancellor in this cause be affirmed or reversed?" 
 the votes were, seven for affirmance and four for re- 
 versal, and it was decided that each party pay his own 
 costs. 
 
 After the judgment of the court was pronounced, 
 affirming the chancellor's decree, the President made 
 the following communication, which was directed to 
 be placed on the minutes of the court. 
 
 " The court would most earnestly recommend to 
 the parties interested in the present controversy, to 
 make a speedy and amicable adjustment of their dis- 
 putes and difficulties. We have always regretted to 
 see these religious controversies brought into our 
 courts of justice ; it has a demoralizing influence on 
 society; is a stumbling-block to the unconverted, and 
 a source of great joy and rejoicing to the infidel. It 
 
 1 Report of Trial, pp. 28 to 42. 
 2R2 
 
\ 
 
 334 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 is therefore the sincere desire of the court, that all 
 parties concerned will make every effort in their 
 power to effect a speedy compromise of their diffi- 
 culties, on such just and equitable principles as may 
 properly become those who profess to be influenced 
 by the light within, the Spirit of God operating on 
 sincere and honest hearts." 
 
 Certificates were subsequently given by the Presi- 
 dent of the court (Elias P. Seeley, Gov. of N. J.) and 
 by all the counsellors, except one, that the decision 
 in this case was not founded on doctrinal points. And 
 six members of the court who voted for affirming the 
 chancellor's decree certified that they adopted the 
 same course of reasoning as that contained in the 
 opinion of Chief Justice Ewing. In delivering his 
 opinion, Judge Ewing had said, "I hope to be able 
 to continue and close this investigation without any 
 inquiry into religious faith or opinions." 
 
 Although the decree of the chancellor was affirmed, 
 one of the main objects of the Orthodox party in 
 bringing the suit was not attained : the closing re- 
 commendation of the court of appeals granted to the 
 larger body of Friends all they asked or desired; that 
 is, a compromise of their conflicting claims on just 
 and equitable principles." This recommendation 
 was in the year 1836 embodied in a law passed by 
 the Legislature of New Jersey, which settled the 
 controversy in regard to the property of the Society 
 in that State. 
 
 It enacts and provides that, " In case of any divi- 
 sion, secession or separation now existing in said 
 unincorporated Society of Friends in this State on 
 conscientious grounds, when both parties profess to 
 adhere to the faith, system of discipline, constitution 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION". 335 
 
 and government of said Society when in unity, that 
 then and in such cases, the personal and real estate 
 of whatever kind (excepting burial-grounds) of said 
 Society held for its use in trust or otherwise shall be 
 divided between the parties in such division, seces- 
 sion or separation, in the same manner as if they 
 were tenants in common of said estate," &c. 
 
 Section IV. "That the burial-grounds of said So- 
 ciety when in unity shall forever remain free and 
 common for the burial of the members of either 
 party and their descendants, the same as if no divi- 
 sion, secession or separation had been made." 
 
 Section V. "And if in the course of proceedings 
 it should become expedient to ascertain the number 
 of members of said Society connected with the said 
 parties respectively, and any member thereof shall 
 be under the age of 21 years, such infant shall be 
 counted with the party to which his or her father 
 belongs, if he is living, and if not, to that which his 
 or her mother belongs, if living, and if she is also dead, 
 with the party to which his or her guardian belongs." 
 
 The Separation took place in New York Yearly 
 Meeting in the 5th month, 1828, by the withdrawal 
 of the Orthodox party, leaving the larger body in 
 possession of the meeting-houses in the city. In the 
 same year the separation extended to most of the 
 Quarterly and Monthly meetings with the same re- 
 sult, a very large portion of the meeting-houses being 
 left in possession of Friends by the withdrawal of the 
 orthodox minority. In the city of New York, the 
 Mouthly Meeting assembled at Rose Street House, 
 6th month 4th, 1828, and after the usual time pro- 
 ceeded to business. Shortly after the opening of the 
 
336 THE PROPERTY QUESTION". 
 
 meeting, those called Orthodox, being a small mi- 
 nority, voluntarily withdrew, when the meeting unan- 
 imously agreed to appoint a committee to inform 
 those who had seceded that Friends "were willing 
 to do them justice in relation to the property belong- 
 ing to the Monthly Meeting." The committee was 
 continued four years, and conferred individually with 
 a considerable number of the Orthodox party, assur- 
 ing them of the disposition of the Monthly Meeting 
 to do them justice, and inviting them to accept an 
 equitable arrangement; but they could effect nothing; 
 the other party invariably professing to consider 
 themselves entitled to the possession of the whole 
 property in question. 
 
 The Meeting for Sufferings in New York, on the 
 6th of 10th month, 1828, adopted the following min- 
 ute : — 
 
 "The meeting having its attention turned to that 
 part of the extracts received from the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, which advises, 'That in all cases where the rights 
 of property are involved, Friends carefully maintain 
 our Christian character for justice and equity,' and 
 in order to carry the same into effect the follow- 
 ing Friends are appointed to confer with those who 
 have separated from us, (commonly called Orthodox 
 Friends,) and to inform them that the Meeting for 
 Sufferings are disposed to come to an equitable settle- 
 ment in relation to the property belonging to the 
 Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " Committee, — Samuel Mott, Thomas Everit, Thos. 
 Walker, John Barrow, Nathan Comstock, Ja- 
 cob Haviland, and Whitehead Hicks. " 
 
 To the above extract the committee subjoined the 
 following notice: — "The committee above named 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 837 
 
 are individually ready to receive proposals from those 
 styled Orthodox, and to meet them whenever desired 
 so to do, for the purpose of a full and explicit ar- 
 rangement. 
 
 " Signed on behalf of the committee, Thos. Everit." 
 
 This communication was sent to many of their 
 leading members, and also published in a periodical 
 of the day; but after a lapse of two years, the com- 
 mittee had to report that no reply had been received. 
 
 In the "Winter of 1832, an influential member of 
 the Orthodox party intimated to a Friend that they 
 were willing to confer in an unofficial manner rela- 
 tive to the property. This was acceded to, and ten 
 of each party met together for the purpose ; when 
 the Orthodox party made verbally a proposition to 
 this effect: That one of the meeting-houses in the 
 city should be surrendered to them with its adjacent 
 property, — that they should continue to have, as they 
 then had, the use of the burial-ground in common 
 with us, and "that their members would then make 
 a verbal declaration to us that with these possessions 
 and immunities they would be entirely satisfied." 
 
 The ten Friends sent them in the 12th month, 1832, 
 a written answer, in which, after reciting the propo- 
 sition, they stated that they had carefully considered 
 it, and made a pretty general exhibit of it to their 
 fellow-members, and the result was, that it would be 
 accepted, provided the Orthodox meeting would ex- 
 ecute in their favor a quit-claim deed to the remain- 
 der of the property both real and personal ; " and 
 this," they added, "if more agreeable to you, might 
 be done through the name of an individual so as to 
 avoid the commitment, on your part, of a particle of 
 your religious or social testimonies. Far be it from 
 IV— 29 
 
338 THE PROPEETY QUESTION". 
 
 us, to seek to draw from you an acknowledgment, 
 in any the most remote degree, of our claim to the 
 title of Friends or Quakers." * * * * "We trust 
 you will recognize in the above, an evidence of sin- 
 cere amity and good feeling towards your Society, in 
 which we subscribe ourselves your sincere friends. 
 Signed, David S. Brown, William Wright, Robert 
 Hicks, Isaac T. Hopper, Thos. Leggett, Jr., Thos. H. 
 Legett, Samuel Willets, Samuel Hicks, George T. 
 Trimble, Nathan Comstock." 
 
 To this communication they received no reply. 
 
 In the Tenth month, 1833, the Orthodox party in 
 New York filed a Bill in Chancery for the recovery 
 of all the property, with an application for an injunc- 
 tion, and the appointment of a receiver to take charge 
 of the same ; and in the 12th month following, the 
 Monthly Meeting of Friends in the city, being ap- 
 prised of this movement, appointed a committee, with 
 full power either to compromise by amicable negotia- 
 tion, or to defend the suit at law or in equity. 
 
 The Meeting for Sufferings also took up the sub- 
 ject, and with a view to an amicable settlement sent 
 a deputation with a letter addressed "To the Meeting 
 for Sufferings now sitting on Henry Street," — that 
 being the place of meeting of those called Orthodox. 
 But the meeting thus addressed declined to receive 
 the communication. 
 
 The Chancery bill filed by the Orthodox party in 
 New York was similar to that filed in New Jersey 
 It contained the same confession of faith, and reiter- 
 ated their oft-repeated charges against Elias Hicks 
 and those they called his followers. 
 
 In the answer to this bill, filed by Friends as defend- 
 ants, they deny the charges made by the Orthodox, and 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 339 
 
 affirm that their belief and that of the Yearly Meeting 
 to which they belong is the same as that of the early 
 Friends, which they state as follows: "The said So- 
 ciety of Friends, as appears from historical records, 
 and the writings of early Friends, have always be- 
 lieved in the existence of the Father, the Son, and the 
 Holy Spirit, and that these three are one. That there 
 is one holy, just, merciful, almighty and eternal God, 
 who is the Father of all things ; that appeared to the 
 holy patriarchs and prophets of old, at sundry times 
 and in divers manners ; and in One Lord Jesus Christ, 
 the everlasting Wisdom, divine Power, true Light, 
 only Saviour and Preserver of all, the same One, holy, 
 just, merciful, almighty and eternal God, who, in the 
 fulness of time took, and was manifest in the flesh; 
 at which time he preached (and his disciples after 
 him) the everlasting gospel of repentance and promise 
 of remission of sins and eternal life to all that heard 
 and obeyed ; who said, he that is with you (in the 
 flesh) shall be in you (by the Spirit), and though he 
 left them (as to the flesh), yet not comfortless, for he 
 would come to them again (in the Spirit), for the Lord 
 Jesus Christ is that Spirit, a manifestation whereof is 
 given to every one to profit w r ithal. In which Holy 
 Spirit they believe, as the same almighty and eternal 
 God." 1 
 
 " In relation to the outward manifestation of Jesus 
 Christ, they have always believed in the scripture tes- 
 timony of his miraculous conception, birth, life, mira- 
 cles, sufferings, death, resurrection and ascension : an 1 
 they further believe, that ' he is the propitiation for 
 our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins 
 of the whole world.' Neither is there salvation in 
 
 1 Perm's Innocency with her Open Face, 
 
340 THE PKOPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 any other: for there is none other name under heaven 
 given among men, whereby we must be saved." 
 
 "They also believe in the inspiration and divine 
 authority of the Holy Scriptures ; and that they are 
 profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for 
 instruction in righteousness; that the man of God 
 may be perfect, thoroughly furnished with all good 
 works." 
 
 This statement of their belief was also inserted in 
 another bill they filed in chancery the following year, 
 in the same suit, and an addition was then made of 
 some paragraphs from Bevan's Summary of the Doc- 
 trines of Friends, and "W. Penn's Christian Quaker. 1 
 
 In the First month, 1835, the chancellor gave his 
 decision. After reviewing the grounds of the appli- 
 cation for an injunction, made by the Orthodox party, 
 he concludes in these words : " There being scarcely 
 a colour or pretence for this application, on any of 
 these grounds, I must refuse it with costs." One of 
 the grounds alluded to, was the charge brought by 
 the Orthodox party, that the defendants had departed 
 from the doctrines of Friends. In relation to this, the 
 chancellor remarks : " Their creeds, though somewhat 
 differently expressed, are substantially and virtually 
 the same, and on this subject, whatever dissensions 
 may have been produced by a difference of opinion 
 heretofore, there would really appear to be no room 
 at this day for disputation or controversy." 
 
 It appears that the Friends who defended this suit 
 acted judiciously in giving an exposition of their 
 faith, which, though brief, is explicit. 
 
 A statement has been made in some publications 
 
 1 See Extract from Bevan's Summary, in Chapter VI. of this 
 treatise. 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 341 
 
 of the Orthodox party, that two suits were brought 
 against them in the State of New York, soon after the 
 separation, for property in their possession, belonging 
 to the Society of Friends. In explanation of this 
 matter the following facts are stated in a communica- 
 tion signed by Saml. Willets, on behalf of a commit- 
 tee of New York Monthly Meeting. At the time of 
 the separation, the Nine-Partners' Boarding-school 
 and Farm were under the care of a committee, nearly 
 all of whom were Friends, (belonging to the larger 
 body,) but they had placed a superintendent in charge, 
 who took sides with the Orthodox party, and having 
 barred the doors and windows, he refused admission 
 to the committee that employed him. The trustee 
 who held the title to the real estate, and a few indi- 
 viduals of the school committee, without the knowl- 
 edge of the rest of the committee, proceeded so far as 
 to have a writ of ejectment served on the superinten- 
 dent; but no further proceedings were had in the 
 case, for when it became known to the general com- 
 mittee, they promptly had the suit withdrawn. 
 
 The school property, together with a fund of $10,000, 
 belonging to the institution, remained in possession 
 of the Orthodox party. There was, however, another 
 piece of land detached from the school property, but 
 belonging to the institution, that the committee 
 retained in their possession and leased to a tenant. 
 
 The other suit alluded to, was for $500 belonging 
 to the Purchase school-fund. The treasurer had 
 loaned it under such circumstances that he felt him- 
 self accountable for it, and brought the suit on his 
 own responsibility without consulting the Meeting. 
 He obtained a verdict in his favor, but through the 
 
 aid of eminent counsel employed by the Orthodox 
 29* IV — 2 s 
 
342 AMICABLE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YORK. 
 
 party, the cause was removed for a hearing in chan- 
 cery. 
 
 The decision of the chancellor confirmed the ver- 
 dict first obtained, with additional costs. 
 
 The burying-ground belonging to New York 
 Monthly Meeting was used in common by both par- 
 ties. The larger body retained the title in their hands, 
 but immediately after the separation, their committee 
 instructed the sexton to pay the same respect to the 
 orders of the Orthodox committee as to their own, 
 for the interment of the dead ; and that party were 
 informed that if they preferred to employ a sexton of 
 their own, no objection would be made. 1 
 
 It is highly gratifying to record the fact that an 
 amicable settlement of the property question has been 
 made between the two sections claiming to be the 
 Monthly Meeting of Friends of New York city. In 
 the 5th month, 1851, a committee appointed by the 
 Monthly Meeting of Friends in that city reported 
 that they had conveyed "to their brethren' called 
 Orthodox Friends, a portion of the land lately pur- 
 chased in the city of Brooklyn for a burying-ground, 
 north of Twelfth Street; also seven lots of land on 
 Christy Street, and three lots on Houston Street, in 
 the city of New York. At the same time they re- 
 ceived from the Orthodox Friends deeds releasing to 
 them all right or claim to any portion of the property 
 on Rose, and William, and Hester Streets : these being 
 the lots on which were situated two meeting-houses 
 in the city of New York, that Friends had occupied 
 after the Separation. In making this arrangement, 
 
 1 Bill in Chancery, New York, 5th mo., 1834, by John Corlies, 
 Ba. Corse, S. Willets, and others. 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 343 
 
 Friends believed they had conveyed to their Ortho- 
 dox brethren their full proportion of the property, 
 and they placed the offer they had made on the 
 ground that it was a "voluntary peace-offering for 
 the purpose of restoring and promoting good fellow- 
 ship and kind feelings amongst brethren." This 
 happy result has, in a good measure, been realized, 
 not only in the cities of New York and Brooklyn, 
 but wherever a similar course has been pursued. 
 
 Arrangements are now in progress to make an 
 equitable division of the property that belonged to 
 Baltimore Yearly Meeting at the time of the Separa- 
 tion. The number of those called Orthodox Friends 
 being a small proportion of the whole, they withdrew 
 at that time, and left the larger body in possession 
 of the meeting-houses, except that at Hopewell in 
 Frederick County, Va., which has been occupied 
 jointly by both. The burial-grounds throughout the 
 limits of the Yearly Meeting have been used in 
 common by both sections without contention or 
 hindrance from either. 
 
 The larger body, which holds its Yearly Meeting 
 in Lombard Street meeting-house, Baltimore, has 
 made overtures to the Orthodox Friends for an ami- 
 cable settlement of the property question, as appears 
 by the following extracts from its minutes, viz. : 
 
 " The Clerks were directed to insert in our Extracts, the follow- 
 ing Report of the Committee of the Meeting for Sufferings to that 
 Body, respecting the division of Property with our Orthodox 
 Brethren, viz.: 
 
 To the Meeting for Sufferings : 
 
 The Committee appointed at our last Meeting, upon the subject 
 of the division of Property with the other branch of Society, Re- 
 port that on the 20th of the 1st month last, they addressed to our 
 
344 THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 
 
 Orthodox Friends, a Communication, of which the following is a 
 copy, viz. : 
 
 To the Meeting for Sufferings which represents the Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends that meets at Courtland Street, Baltimore. 
 
 Dear Friends, — We have been appointed a Committee by 
 our Meeting for Sufferings, to endeavor to carry into effect the 
 object embraced in the following minute, which was adopted by 
 our late Yearly Meeting, viz. : 
 
 ' The Meeting for Sufferings is directed to open communica- 
 tion with the other part of Society, commonly called our Orthodox 
 Friends, for an equitable division of all the property we now hold, 
 which was formerly jointly held by them and us, according to the 
 number of members of the two branches at the time of the sepa- 
 ration ; and, if amicable arrangements to that end can be effected, 
 to pay them the amount that may be agreed upon, as their just 
 share of all the property held by us.' 
 
 We think it proper to state, that it has been the desire of some 
 of us, for many years past, that a course of this kind should be 
 pursued, and efforts to that end have been heretofore made ; but 
 the body of our Society was not then prepared to adopt the meas- 
 ure. It therefore seemed right, in order to move in that har- 
 mony which is so beautiful and healthful in a religious organiza- 
 tion, to wait, as for the hindmost of the Flock, remembering the 
 sacred injunction, ' He that believeth, shall not make haste/ 
 and remain alive under the concern, till the opposition should be 
 removed. 
 
 We are now favored to be able to say, that this desired period 
 has arrived. The preceding minute was adopted by our late 
 Yearly Meeting, with entire unanimity. Not one voice was op- 
 posed thereto. 
 
 Now, dear Friends, it is our ardent desire, that the proposition 
 of our Yearly Meeting, thus made, may be entertained by you, in 
 the same kind and conciliatory spirit in which it is tendered ; 
 and of this, we have no reason whatever to doubt. And moreover, 
 we hope and trust, that the reciprocal exercise of kind and good 
 feeling, in the amicable adjustment of this subject, may be the 
 means of bringing us closer and closer to each other, in kindness 
 and charity, by bringing us nearer and nearer to God, in the 
 bonds of His love. 
 
 The present communication is made in entire frankness, and 
 
THE PROPERTY QUESTION. 345 
 
 with strict integrity of purpose, and, if we know our own hearts, 
 
 in true brotherly and Christian feeling, in which we can subscribe 
 
 ourselves your sincere Friends, 
 
 Benjn. Hallowell, 
 
 Samuel Townsend, 
 
 Samuel M. Janney, 
 
 David G. McCoy, 
 
 Benjn. P. Moore, 
 
 Joseph Matthews, 
 
 Rich ar«d H. Townsend, and 
 
 Gerard H. Reese. 
 
 Baltimore, 1st Month 20th, 1865. 
 
 On behalf of the Meeting for Sufferings which represents 
 Baltimore Yearly Meeting of Friends, that meets at Lombard 
 Street. 
 
 To which communication we received the following reply, viz. : 
 
 To Benjamin Hallowell and others, Committee on behalf of the 
 Meeting for Sufferings which represents the Yearly Meeting of 
 Friends that meets at Lombard Street. 
 
 Dear Friends, — We have considered the communication 
 addressed to our Meeting for Sufferings, by you, as a Committee 
 of your Meeting. 
 
 There was not time to call our Meeting together, but as mem- 
 bers of it, we frankly state our views, which we believe to be 
 those of our other members. 
 
 The proposition embraced in the minute of your Yearly Meet- 
 ing, is acceptable to us, and we are prepared, with the consent of 
 our meeting, to carry it out in the same Christian spirit in which 
 we believe it has been proposed. 
 
 We cordially reciprocate the kind and brotherly feelings which 
 you have expressed, and remain your friends. 
 
 R. M. Janney, 
 Francis T. King, 
 James Carey, 
 James Carey Thomas, 
 Jesse Tyson, 
 Miles White, 
 
 Thos. R. Matthews. 
 Baltimore, 1st Month 20th, 1865. 
 
 Four members of our Committee, by appointment, subsequently 
 had a very satisfactory personal interview with four of these 
 
 2S2 
 
346 
 
 THE PROPEETY QUESTION. 
 
 Friends, during which they expressed a willingness to unite with 
 us in an application to the Maryland Legislature for power to sell 
 and convey the Fair Hill Boarding School Property, and to aid 
 in selling the Pasture Lot, and in the valuation of the Lombard 
 Street Property. Indeed, a disposition was gratifyingly mani- 
 fested to do their full part to carry out the arrangement proposed 
 by our Yearly Meeting. 
 
 From the length of time that has since elapsed, the Committee 
 believe it to be impracticable to ascertain, with entire precision, 
 the number of members of the two branches at the time of the 
 separation; but our Orthodox Friends, in our interview with 
 them, expressed their belief, that the relation was about one to 
 four, which would give one-fifth, or twenty per cent, for their 
 share, and that they were willing to settle upon this basis ; and 
 although, from the best estimates we have been able to gain, this 
 is a large proportion, yet the Committee have thought it best, for 
 the sake of that precious harmony that happily exists between 
 the Representatives of the two branches, who have had inter- 
 course with each other upon the subject, and which harmony we 
 desire may increase and extend, to recommend to the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, that a settlement be authorized with them in this 
 proportion. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
 
 Benj'n. P. Moore, 
 
 „ , . David G. McCoy. 
 
 Baltimore, Zd Month llth, 1865. 
 
 This Report, upon being read and considered, was approved 
 and adopted by the Meeting for Sufferings, and the Committee 
 was continued, and authorized and directed to divide the property 
 with our Orthodox Friends, upon the terms contained in the Re- 
 port; that is, to pay them one-fifth of the net proceeds of the sale 
 of the Fair Hill Boarding School Property, one-fifth of the net 
 proceeds of the sale of the Pasture Lot, and one-fifth of one-half 
 the valuation that may be agreed upon of the Lombard Street 
 Meeting House Property, these three pieces of property being all 
 that is embraced in the minute of our Yearly Meeting, under 
 which we are acting." 
 
 This arrangement, it will be observed, relates only 
 to the property held by the Yearly Meeting, which 
 
CONCLUSION. 347 
 
 includes one-half of the Lombard Street meeting- 
 house, the other half belongs to the Monthly Meet- 
 ing of Baltimore. The property belonging to the 
 several Monthly meetings remains mostly in the pos- 
 session of the larger body, and the burial-grounds are 
 used in common by both. 
 
 The cordial feelings manifested in the foregoing 
 correspondence will probably lead to an amicable 
 settlement of the property question in the several 
 Monthly meetings, and must have a favorable influ- 
 ence in promoting mutual kindness between parties, 
 who, in so many points of doctrine and discipline, are 
 in agreement. 
 
 In closing the history of the Separation of Friends 
 in America, the mournful consideration presents 
 itself, that nearly all the prominent actors engaged in 
 it have passed away from this stage of existence. 
 May we not hope that in the clearer atmosphere of 
 the spiritual world, those who differed here, will no 
 longer " see as through a glass darkly," but, coming 
 face to face, will discover in each other those pure 
 principles and heavenly affections which are the fruits 
 of the Spirit, uniting every member of the Church to 
 its glorious Head, Christ Jesus. 
 
 It is not in entire uniformity of religious opinions 
 that the harmony and prosperity of the Church must 
 be sought, for the indwelling and government of the 
 Spirit of Christ can alone enable his dedicated fol- 
 lowers "to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond 
 of peace." 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 
 0035522364 
 
 92 . 
 
*<n