Hut' tl '

I).

'>r:

ill , , ' r- -

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

Gift of
Haverford College

REFUTATION OF
SOME OF THE MORE
MODERN MISREPRESENTATIONS

SOCIETY OF FRIENDS, I
COMMONLY CALLED

RAKERS;

WITH

A LIFE OF JAMES NAYLER i

Br JOSEPH GURNET BEVAN;

ALSO,
< SY PERMISSION OF THE MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS )
A SUMMARY OF THE
HISTORY, DOCTRINE AND DISCIPUNE OF FRIEND3.

LONDON :
PRINTED AND SOLD BY WILLIAM PHILLIPS,
PEORG? YARD, LOMBA^RD STREET,
1800.

SmcE this Refutation went to Prefs, a Worl tntitled ' A New
' and Impartial Hiftory ofthe Church ofChr'ijl' by T.HAirnis,
has some to the notice ofthe Author ; •who takes this opportu
nity of remarking, that he apprehends there tvlll be found in the
follonu'mg pages, an anf'wer for fo much of that book as con
tains erroneous Afferttons refpeS'tng the Society of Friends ;
mofl of the general charges of T. H Air eis p againfl the early
members of that Society, being particularly or virtually dlf
cuffed under fome one or more qf the heads^ into which this
pamphlet is divided.
2jd iJl Month, 1800.

'»•*-

INTRODUCTION.

When the religious fociety of Friends firft
attrafted public notice, it had, this mark in com
mon with the primitive Chriiiian church, it ¦was'
every -where fpoken agaitift. Numerous were
the mifreprefentations which its enemies poured
forth from the prefs ; many of which are now only
remembered, or heard of, by the anfwe'rswhich were
given Eo; them. Others have ftill furvived, and
are occafipnally brought forth from their obfcurity
to ajifwer the purpofe of moderri, malevolence; in
which, when they fall into the hinds of fuch as do
not know that they have tbeen fully refured, they^
are' but too fuccefsful. There are alfo fome later
authors who are noti to be fi^ifpefted of a wifh to
mifi^prefent us; but whoi,idrjdwing their information
frora unauthentic records, are from time to time
adding to the mift with which prejudice delights to
keep us furrounded ; and caufing thofe who, in their
fearch after tri^th in matters of religion, might be
willing to examine our doftrines in their genuine
colours, to turn away in difguft from a people, -which,
viewed through the medium of inifreprefentation,
appears little more than a heap of deformity.
We are certainly, compared with the millions of
our coufatrymen, l%t few in number; the world, in
its purfuit of fame, of wealth, and of pleafure, takes
little account oif us: and the trafts, which, on

2
particular occafions, have been publifhed by our
authors, either to elucidate our doftrines, or to
defend them, feldom attraft notice enough to be
much purchafed out of the pale of our own
Society. It is not therefore always eafy to find the
means of fettirig the public right, when we arc
fure its credulity is abufed, ' Where few are dif-
pofed to liften, fmall is the encouragement to
fpeak. ¦ I have, however, thought- that it might be worth
while to review fome accounts, that have of later
time been given of us. Indeed it feems a duty-
which we owe to ourfelves, and to thofe, who are
liable to be milled by them ; and it is poflible that
a work profelling to oppofe names of acknowledged
eminence, and works which have received the
(lamp of public.approbation, may be read for the
fake of 'the celebrity of the authors whole opinion
it controverts ; though its own author, and the
fubjeft on which he -writes, fliould not otherwifc
be fufficient to procure notice.
The reader will perceive, as he goes ohj the
motives which have given rife to a feparate account
of James Nayler, and to the annexing of. the
Summary.

A
REFUTATION, &c.

SECTION I.
M O S H E I M.
rr is not to be wondered at, that Mo(heim,>in'
his ecclefiaftical hiftory, fliould have faid fome
things amifs, among the many things which he has
fjild ; and as his work is much read, and in general
defervedly admired, his ill report extends further, -
and does raore injury, than that of an inferior
author. What degree of credit is to be given to
that part, which treats of the Society called^
Quakers, will, I hope, appear from the following
remarks : in making which I wifh to acquit him of
ill willj and to, allow for his want of perfonal ac
quaintance with his fubjeft, and the ftrangenefs with
which the fimplicity of a Friend muft appear in the
eye of a Lutheran.
His account of our origin, needlefsly inferted in his
hiftory ofthe Arminians, wherein we are compared
to a rank weed, fpringing up from the negleft of
reafon, may be paffed over, as a rhetorical flourilhj
inferted to fill up the antithefis, or to ferve as a
foil to relieve the fubje<J1:on which he was treating.
But, when he makes us his more immediate theme,
in whatever hp is deficient, or whatever foreiga
A z-

matter he may have allowed himfelf to add, wc
have a right to expeft, that in his affertions hehe
well founded and accurate. In the following
paffages (taken from Machine's Svo Englifti edit.
of 1768) he appears to me to be, either ill informed,
inaccurate, or hable to a charge of malevolence,
which it is not pleafant to bring againft fo learned
and inftruftive an author. In page 29, line 2, the
Quakers are faid to have made ufe of their pre
tended infpiration to excite the ' moft vehement
' commotions in church and ftate.' Now I appeal to
the page of Englifli hiftory, and defy any man to
fhow that in the ftate, any commotions were ever
excited by thefe peopile, much lefs (if that were
polTible)' through defign. Whitelock, a member of
parliament, and a circumftantial recorder of tranf-
Hf^ipg^i at the time of which Moflieim treats,
although. he now and then mentions the QuakcrSj
r.elates iio commotion to. which they gave rife. As
to the church J it is pofiTible, fhe might be troubled
at feeing her authority difputed; but as the avowed
ground of all dilTent is the apprehenfion' of error
in the eftablilhment from which it feparates, the
Friends muft be contented with the common lot
of reformers, as to the public opinion.
The next ill founded (or unfounded) afiTertion of
which I fhall take notice, is in page 30, line i4j &c.
where Moftieim confederates Barclay, Keith, and
Fiflier, , into a triumvirate, in order to raife that
beautiful fabric, of Our difcipline, which he feems
to think could never have arifen from what he
calls the grofs ignorance pf Fox. As I may have
.%ture occafion to vindicate George Fox's memory
from this and other afperfions, it will here only be
jieceffary to feek for the authority on which
Molheira refts his affertions. As he cites none

and in citations he is generally liberal, it is not very
unfair to fuppofe he had none; but as the difci
pline has been an objeft of admiration, and George
Fox an objeft of contempt, it was difficult to be
lieve that it had him for its author ; and therefore
not unnatural to afcribe it to. others, Neverthelefsj,
our own .hiftorical memoirs do not aftribe the
eftablifliraent of the difcipline, to either of thofd
three perfons. If we underftand by difcipline,
either the fetting, up bf the monthly meetings, or
the mode of proceeding in them, we have no
records from which we can even infer that Barclay,
Keith, and Fifher, had any fhare in it-; or that it
was not chiefly, if not wholly, brought about
by the means of Fox. Indeed it is from his
works alone, that we have any clear account of
the biifinefs. He defcribes circiimftantially his
journeys through England, for the . purpofe of
eft:ablilhing monthly meetings. It was in 1667,
the year in which Barclay, then nineteen years old,
joined the Society ; and whofe youth therdforej
both as a man and a Friend, makes it improbable"
he fhould fo foon be a colleague of George Fox.
As to Samuel Fifher, he. died in 1665, in prifon,
where he had been- about a year and a half;
and of about the laft four years of his life he
was three yearsand a half in different prifons.f
Defcribing thefe journeya^ George generally ufes
the plural ; but he mentions, on this occafion, no
particular perfons as compranions in the fervice, as
on other occafions he does, pafticularly in his travels
in Germany, &c. where Keith among others is
mentioned. William.Penn, in his 'Rife and Pro-
grefs,' &c. gives no coadjutor to Fox ; but fays thatj
* the brethren met him from place to place.' As
-¦_.', 1 ... ( ' '
* Prefatory Epiftle to Filher's WTJrksjty EUij Hookes.
A 4

to the. rules of the Society, whoever will confult
the printed colleftion of them,* will fee that they
have flowed from time to time, from the yearly
meeting itfelf; but much of the fubftance of them
is to be found in Fox's epiftles of 1668, and 1669,
in the colleftion of them printed In 1698, when
his memory was ftill frefli. -Penn's account is dated
1694. Fox died in 1690.
At page "3 3, we are informed of divers inteftine
difputes which arofe among the Quakers ; ' which,'
¦fays our author, ' were generally terminated in a
fhort time, and without difiiculty ; as they were
about matters of difcipline, certain cuftoms and
manners, and other affairs of little 'moment.' With
out ftopping to confider whether difcipline be a
thing of little moment or not^ it may be obferved,
that conteft is not always eafily adjufted, in pro
portion to the fmallhefs ©f the matter in difpute ;
and therefore that it feems probable there was fome
internal foundnefs in the conftitution of this body,
which could thus eafily heal after accidental wounds.
However, as Mofheim mentions the years in which
thefe differences took place ; and, in a note, quotes
Sewel (wrong fpelled Shewellj as his authority,
it may not be amifs to judge of his accuracy by
adverting to the hiftory of. thofe years in Sewel ;
in order to difcover whether his recital warrant us
to believe, that our early Friends were deficient in
' fraternal charity and union.' In 1656, we find
two inftances, which are probably thofe to which
Mofheim alludes. One is an '.account of fome ex
travagant people at Rotterdam, whora, it feems,
the magiftrates fent to Bedlam. Thefe therefore may
be fuppofed to have bred no fchifm in the Quaker-
« Extrafts from the minutes and advices of the'Yearly Meetin? from
ts firft inftitution. 410.1783. ,);•,,

church. The other is the well-known (though ill
Imderftood) inftance of James Nayler, to whofe
cafeT have allotted a fpecial account.* In this
place it may fuffice to fay, that he raifed no difpute
about either doftrine or difcipline ; but only was
thought to ovcr-rate his own talents, and to be ex
travagantly admired by others. In doftrine, for
any thing that appears, he was an orthodox Friend.
In 1 66 1 , Sewel mentions a divifion raifed by the
means of John Perrot. This had more the afpeft
of fchifm than the preceding ; yet Ibelieve it will
not be found that it occafipned any feparation in
the body ; and the facility with which it was fup-
preffed, through the affiduity of George Fox, feems
to prove, even to thofe who will not allow a divine
interference, either that the body really poffeffed
that energy of health to which I have alluded, or
that the ' illiterate, grofsly ignorant, melaiKhbly,
* and fanatical Fox,' (to ufe the language of
Mofheim) was a man of uncommon adroitnefs in
compofing differences, f
Ah aftual feparation Is mentioned, under the
year 1683, on account of difcipline; fome perfons
r^fufmg to fubmit to the eftaljlifhed rules ; and
alleging that, feeing all h«d a meafure of ther Spirit
oiF Chrift within them, they ought not to be fubjeA
to their brethren. Thefe went fo far as to fet up
feparate meetings ; but have by degrees fo dWiiidled
" " away as that (to ufe the expreffion of Sewel, whom
Mofheim quotes) ' they have vanilhed like fnow in
the fields.'
The difturbance raifed by Keith, firft in America,
» See the Life annexed. .^,
' + An Accfiunt of this temporary divifion may be-feen ii) the Hiftary-of
"the Ljfe,9f ThoMas Elwtfod, anno 1667: the edition of v^hieh of 1791,
is in print, ind fome of the older ones to be niet with. EUwood himr
i^lf had at firft joined the diffentients.
A 4

and afterwards in England, does indeed appear to
have bepn a matter difiicult to adjuft; biit can
fcarcely with propriety be called a rent in the body.
Let us ftate the fafl, fo far as it relates to Keithj,
in the words of Moftieim. ' Keith was the)^pf|
Jearned of the Gommuaity. By his innovations he
excited di.fcord. He was charged with errors in
his tljeolpgy. in his turn he charged the American
Friends with unfound doftrine ; particulariy with
^ronfidering the whole hiftory of Chrift as an alle
gory.' From this we learni that he was an innovator,
and was oppofed. His affertions, therefore, about
the faith of his American brethren, ought to be
received with caution ;, they might be the artifice
of a crafty man to divert the attention of the
Society from his o'wn errors ; but at any rate they
are a foundation too fleuder; for the affertion of
Mofheim to reft on ; f namely, that the American
Quakers maintain publicly that Chrift never exifted
but in the hearts of the faithful. Two things prove
here was no fchifm. One is, that Keith, the oppo
nent of the American Friends, was difowned (or
as Mofheim has it, excommunicated) by the EngJilh
Friends, after having pleaded his own caufe pef-
fonaHy, and refided among them fome time ; the
Other, that the friends of America and Great Britain
have kept up, before and fince that time, the moft
brotherly intercourfe ; preachers from one country
have been almoft continually travelling, with a
cordial ^ welcome, in the other ; and tbe general
affemblies of each, particularly the large ones pf
London . and , Philadelphia, have all along kept up
a harmonious epiftolary correfpondence. I think,
therefore, we may venture to fay that, here was
no divifion ; to which I ftiall take the liberty to add,
that the account of the American Quakers' dilbeliel"

- 9
of Chrift'? incarnation, is a falfehood. Mofheim
indeed would feem to infinuate a like fecret opinion
in the Englifh Quakers ; but no one conve^fant
with their writings can admit the charge : and if
the Englifh Friends be cleared from the afperfions
their long continued unity with their tranfmarine
brethren,^ removes it alfo from thefe. , As to
poor , Keith, Mofheim and his tranflator are at
variance refpefting the motives of what, Mofheim
calls, his return to the bofom of the Englifh church.
His uniting with her, for it muft be recollefted that
he had been a Prefbyterian, was more likely to hz^e
been occafioned by the warmth of her bofom to his
declining years, in a country 'living, than by e-x-
afperation at his difownment by. the Friends, or
reconciliation -with a body, frora which I apprehend
he had never ftrayed. ¦ . -
The affertion, at page 42, line 20, that they
never fahite any perfon they meet by the way, is
intirely falfe. Filfe alfo is it, that they refufe to
appear on behalf of their property before a civil
tribunal.* Thefe circumftances. are mentioned, un
true as they are, as proofs of an auftere, ftiff,
proud, aild formal fpirit. The tame relinquifhing
pf their property, and non-refiftance of injury, are
however ill adduced as a proof of ftiffnefs ; nor
ai;e the ruftic fimplicity of their apparel, and the
frugality of their tables, mentioned juft afier^ much
better felefted as inftances. of their pride. Such
are the incpufiftenciigs of writers who meddle with
that which they do not thoroughly underftand 1,
or inveftigate. Wifer were it, with the fage of
Gay, to fay, mutatis mutandis :
My pen, with prudent hand, I rein.
For who writer much, muft write in vain.
* S$« inor« on this fntijeA under die l^»d, Fprmey.

10
.Thenext.page, 43, informs uS of a certain council
of elders, who feem to regulate all the difcipline of
the Society. Now this is far from being the cafe ;
although there are in the Society cert-ain perfons
under, the denomination of elders. With regard
to their office, which is not to interfere in the
general purpofes of difcipline, and for an account
of thofe by whom- thofe purpofes are effefted, I
refer to ' A Summary of the Hiftory; Do£lrine,
' and Difcipline, of Friends,' which is printed with
this ; but left it fliould be fiiid that the modern
praftice only is there defcribcd^ and that Mofheim
refers to the ancient one, \ may inform my
readers, that the embodying of elders for any
purpofe, did not take place until the prefent
century, namely, about 1727, and that it was not
completed until 1754.
; Qne 'thing more is afferted refpefting the
ciders, in thefe words, ' It is well known that in
^ fome places thefe, fpeakers (the- minifters) fliew
' their difcourfes to the ruling elders, before they
' deliveri.them,' &c. Which the places are, is not
mentioned ; butthis I may fay, that fuch a praftice
is not -as-'Moflieim.. fays, ' weft known;' and, as
one who hath beeii, for many years, intimately
acquainted with the concerns of one large meeting,-
and much in the way of knowing the general
praftices. of .the '' body,'-and of thofe relating to
minifters and elders in particular, I may add, that
Inever knew of any fuch praftice. It may further
be noted, that the ftory fuppofes our preachers to
write their difcourfes; a thing entirely difapproved
by the Society, and repugnant to our.principles.
With twp more grofs raifireprefentatiotis I intend
to clofe this, part of my remarks on Mofheim.
One, is the accoimt. that, 'there are in fome of

11
* the moft confiderable congregations, and more
' efpecially in thofe that are erefted in London,
' certain perfons, whofe vocation it is to be always
' prepared to fpeak to the people, to prevent meet-
' ings from being wholly filent.' The other is that,
' thefe appointed fpeakers have a fraall falary.*
Fr"om my long refidence in London (the chief feat
of this pretended provifion), and perfonal acquaint
ance with all the minifters in it of our Society, I
can with- confidence pronounce the firft of thefe
to be falfe ; and, being falfe, the latter falls of
courfe.

12

SECTION, n.
IT now remains, to trace my author through
other erroneous opinions and defcriptions, lib^ally
fpread in his texj: and in his notes ; which, with
ibine remarks on the notes added by A. Maclaine,
Will fuffice to fhow how little dependence ought to be
placed on either the learning of the author, or the
eloquence of the tranflator. In this, however, I
mufl be brief. It is well known, that ignorance
can afk a queftion in a minute, which knowledge
muft take five to anfwer : fo obloquy is generally
quicker work than refutation.
It feems common, with the adverfaries of
Quakerifm, to call George Fox a melancholy mafl.
I rather believe him to have been facetious ; and I
ground my belief on his own journal. Others may
judge for themfelves.
Seftions VI to XI inclufive, give us the author's
account of Quaker-doftrines. In thefe feftions much
is marked as quotation, but without reference to
any author ; and is, probably, not any creed of
the Quakers, but, a creed for the Qiiakers, com
piled out of the author's apprehenfion of their
tenets. He fets out, in his career of defcription,
with a fimilitude which he has found between the
Quakers and the ancient Myftics : a comparifon,
however, which, on the whole, does our Friends
no injury, although it is not drawn with perfeft
accuracy. For it appears, from this very ecclefi
aftical hiftory, that whatever were the failings of
the Myftics, they feem not only to have been re-
pofitories of genuine piety throug.h the corrupt

15
and dark ages of the church i but that in that period
ofit in which, fays our author,* ' its conniption was
' complete, and the abufes that it permitted were
' gone to the greateft height of enormity,' ' if any
* fparks of real piety fubfifted.f to continue the ufe
of his own words, ' they were only to be found
' among the Myftics. For this feft, renouncing the
* fubtletyof the fchpok, the vain contentions of the
'learned, with all the aits and ceremonies of ex-
' ternal worfhip, exhorted their followers to aim at
'nothing but internal fanftity of hegrt, and cora-
• munion with God, the centre and fource of
' perfeftion.' With this comparifon then, between Fricnds^^
and the Myftics, conftantly in his mind, it was not
very unnatural that he fhould ufe their terms, rather
than ours, in his difplay of our doftrine ; although
men of tolerably plain underftandings, fuch as om*
primitive Friends appear to have been, geiieraUj
know, as well as their obfervers and - opponents,
Vv-hat terms will beft explain their feelings. , Now,
our primitive .Friends, not apprehending themfelves j
to be fa much difciples of Origen, as of Jefus Chrift,
andwifhing to vindicate their opinions an terms which
the Chriftian world underftood, drew" their modes
of expreffion chiefly from the Scriptures. Hence
they derived the exprefijons of Word, Light,. Seed,
and Chrifti within ; and not' finding in thfefe facred .
records fiich terms as Divine reafoli. Hidden fpark^j
andHeavenly Sophia, with her Wedding. garments,:
tliefe expreffions are fparingly, if at, all, ufed in/
their writings. Mofheim indeed fays, ' fome' of .
their writers expatiate largely, with the moft gaudyq
and pompous eloquence^ on this nurpiiaL attire^' .
but as he doth not mention his author, and my
•M«lheim'» Hiftory, Vol. III. p< 3PI»— ad EdirioB.

14
reading of Friends' books has not thrown him in
my way, I 'muft withhold, for. the prefent, my
concurrence with his affertion. After all this
colouring of primitive Quakerifm, he relates (in a
note, page 38) the ignorance ofthe modern Quakers
of the fyffem of their anceftors ; and ignorant they
certainly are of its Myftic drefs ; and he adduces
Martin and others as a proof of it, for confounding,
as he afferts, the innate Divine light of the ancient
Quakers, with the operations of the Holy Ghoft.
Now an explanation of an ancient father, who
lived as near to the apoftolic days, as Martin did to
thofe of George Fox, would rather have been
eonfidered as an elucidation, than a contradiftron
of apoftolic doftrine : and it is probable that fome
of the cdnfufioU which Mofheim thought he faw,
arbfe, as is a frequent cafe, from his connefting
¦with our'doftriiies, terms which are not ours.
Our Friends do not, that I recolleft, ufe the word
Innate,* They fay that, the heavenly gift although
in man, is not of man ; and in the journals which
fome of the more ancient Friends have left be
hind' thera, they fpeak of the firft dawnings of the
Divine light on their minds. The journals alfo
of fuch as of later time have left an accbunt in
writing- of their lives, defcribe the operation ofthe
principle in a funilar manner with thofe of earlier '
tiines ; and, I believe, whoever will take the trouble
of reading the firft pages of feveral journals of the
laft century, and the like of feveral of the prefent,
will be abLe to judge for himfelf whether the modern
Quakers have mifunderftood, or relinquiflied, the
principles of their predeceffors.
Inthe fame page with this note, the confequences
• Some fentiments expreffive of fuch a meaning are neverthekfs to be
found in Hugh Turford's 'Grounds of a Holy Lift.' "^''"^•Sf^'' '» "«

15
ofthe Qiiaker's principles are profeffed to be flio-wtl;
one of which is faid to be, that their belief in thfe
in-dwelling (refidence in the in^ylrd frame is nearer
Mdflieim's expreffion) of Chriil:, draws after it an
opinion that the Scriptures do not point out the
Way of faIvation,nor lea'd menin it. (p. 31,1. 15.)
1 might deny this confequence, but fliall here
i-ely for its confutation, on our author's fUbfequent
Words. For he fays (five lines further) ' The only
' advantage, that, in their opinion, refults from a pe-
• rlifalof the holy Scriptures,' is, that they excite to
' liften fo the diftates of the internal word, and to
'go to the fchool of Chrift, who teaches within
* them.' Now if they are allowed to lead men to
Chrift, they muft point out the way, becaufe Chrift
hath faid " I am the way." Mofheim, in this place
(as appears by his note at p. 39) does not pretend
he' is defcribing what the Quakers really hold; but
that which he thinks they muft hold confiftently
witli their tenets; but -this fample may fufiice, to
fliow with what accuracy he draws his confequences ;
and we may confine our remaining examination to
what he afferts to be their belief and their praftice.-
The Ninth Seftion^ therefore, -which denies ' the
cxifterice of the man Chrift Jefus, together with
the accounts iri Scripture of his divine origin, his
life and aftions, his fatisfaftion, merits, and fuffer-
ings' to form an effentialpart of Quaker-theology,
as it is founded on the fandy foundation of the
preceding one, may be trufted to that for its over
throw ; without fpending much more time in re-r
viewing it, than has already been allotted to the
affertions which it contains, refpefting the Ame
rican Quakers, and the infinuatibns refpe£ling the
Englifh ones. I alfo pafs over the Tenth Seftion,
becaufe, although it doth not defcribe with accu-

16
racy, it appears to be clearer than fome others
from obloquy : and as an account of the mode
of worfliip which is owned ^by Friends will accom
pany this work,* the reader may make the com
parifon for himfelf. ,.
Some of the f^llehpodsiof the .Eleveuth Seftion
^at' p. 42) have been already noted : it feems
therefore only, but fcarcely, neceffary to obferve,
tliat if we take his account of Quaker-morality
altogether, it will not fubjeft its profeffors to cen-
fure. Firft he tells us ' that the faithful are to-
' avoid every thing that tends to gratify the external-
'. fenfes and paffions' (this however is no tenet of
the Quakers) ' or,' (and a ufeful word this, or, is)
' fuqh pleafure is to be fo modified by reafon and
* meditation, as to prevent its debafing and corrupt-
* ing the mind.' This latter alternative, which I
believe no Friend will diiclaim, is fo much like:
what the apoftle James calls, ' to keep himfelf un-
fpotted by the world,' that if the poor Quakers do
hut alfo " vifit the widows and fatherlefs in their
" aflSiftion^" it will be hard, for fuch as our author
to Amy, that they have arrived at the fubftance
of true religion.
The. Twelfth Seftion contains fome falfities,
which have been already fpoken to; and fome
inaccuraicies refpefting difcipline which may, bp
jre^ifiedby turning to the account in the Summary.
* See the Summary annexed, Ch. III.

17
SECTION III.
1 HAVE already teftified my readinefs to believe
that the account of our Society by Mofheim, fraught
as it is with inaccuracy, may, neverthelefs, not be
intentionally malevolent : it is to be remembered
that he lived at a diftance from the places where the
members of the Society which he was defcribing
had their abode; and his literary friends in
England were, probably^ fuch as were themfelves
but little acquainted with our principles. This I
am warranted in fuppofing, from having frequently
obferved how little even fome of our countrymen,
•with whom we daily converfe, enter into an exami
nation of our motives : which, as formerly they
had the lot to be mifrejprcfented and traduced, be
caufe our manners were diffimilar to thofe of the
age, and novel ; fo now thefe feem to have become
too familiar, to excite much curiofity refpefting the
principles froiii which they arife. We are juft
eonfidered as a good fort of people in the main^
who reliife to fight, and to fwear, and to pay
tithes ; and while the improved maimers of the
age allow that for thefe, and other fmgularities,
we ought not to be mojefied, the public in general
cares little further about us; and feldom inquires a
reafon of the hope that is in us. Bur the excufes
which I willingly feek for Moflieim, I caunot {jo rea
dily find for his trainflator. Archibald Maclaiiie is
a Briton; a refidew in the country, in which our
Society took its origin, and in which, when he
¦prepw^ his trapflation, as at prefent, it fubfifted,
B

18
It behoved him therefore^ when he found in his
author fo -diftorted a portrait, to have inquired, to
have feen, whethe;- it were a true refemblance of
the original ; and not himfelf to have heightened
the caricature. Let us begin with his note refpeft-
ing the charafter of Fox, whom he labours to
rcprefentas a man of a turbulent fpirit. The fftft
part of the note gives an account of an anonymous
defender of the Quakers, who had reprefented
Fpx as a meek, contented, eafy, fteady man. The:
teftimony of.this author Maclaine rejeQs, becaufe
he fuppofes him to draw his^ account frpm Penn,
•who Was intimate with Fpx; and ; fr0m EUwood,
whp had been in -his company. Maclainp; how
ever chopfes to refer us to Sewel, from -whofe'
hiftory he felefts three inftances of Tox's oppo-
fition to ' minifters in, the public celebration of
divine fervice, at Nottinghara, Mansfield, and
Market Bpfworth.*, I fhall not ftop long to inquire
Whether the fermon be a part of divine fefyice;
nortp admi.t;that.Fox frequendy, in the early part
of his career, did pfomidgate his doftrines in the
public pkces for worfhip ; but, as the pafSiges are
fhprt, fliall , lay , the words of Sewel- before my
readers. The tranfaflions ^re all of the.; year
1649, and. may thqrefpre eafily be found jn any
edition of Sewel. Mine is the firft Efnglifh oiie,
1722. Nottingham — -he. ' went: away to th?
* fteeple-houfe, where 'the priefl took for his text
t thefe words of the apoftle Peter.' « We. have
*' a moft" (probably a miftsyke for, more*) . " fure
*' word of prophecy, whtrevmto ye do WeU that yc
" take heed, as unto^ light that fhineth in a dark
"place, until theday dawn, and the day-ftar arife iu
• It fc^ins, by the ¦waJsr, not eaiy.'m bur trinllation, lo find what eonfti.
tutes the comparifon, in thiB^paSagc." ,. , , *:. ., .'

19
*' your hearts." * And he told the people that thi&
* was the Scripture, by which they were to try all
* doftrines, religions, and opinions. G. Fox hearing
* this, felt fuch mighty power and godly zeal work-
* ing in him, that he was made to cry out, O ! no,
* It is not the Scripture, but it is the Holy Spirit, by
* -which the holy men of God gave forth the Serip-
* tures, whereby opinions, religions, and judgments^
' are to be tried. That it was it, which led into all
* truth, and gave the knowledge thereof. For the
* Jews had the Scriptures, and yet^refifted the Holy
* Ghoft, and reje£l:ed Chrift, the bright morning
* ftar, and perfeciited him and his apoftles ; though
* they tqok upon them to try their doftrine by the
* Scriptures ; but they erred in judgment, and did
* not try them aright, becaufe they did it without
* the Holy Ghoft. He thus fpeaking, the officers
' caime and took him away and put him in a nafty
' ftinking prifon.' Before I proceed, I would juft
remark how little Mofheim, when he faid that, the
modern Quakers mifapprehend the do^rines of
their anceftors, &g. (fee his note at page 38) would
have thanked his tranflator for referring to this
parage. Sewel adds that the fheriff who examined
Fox, fwas fo little. apprehenfive of his turbulence,'
that he] took him to his own houfe from the com
mon prifon ; that he was fo much affected' wifh
the interview,>that he fent for a woman with whom
he had traded, confeffing that he had wronged
her, and muft make teftitution ; and that he and
fome others were moved to exhort the people to
repentance. Such were the effefts of Fox's decla
ration, whether turbulent or otherwife.
The account Sewel gives of the tranfaftion at
Mansfield is this. * Whilft G. Fox was in this
^place, he was moved to go to the fkeple houfe, and
B2

20
' declare there the triith to the prieft and the people;
'.which doing, the people fell on him, «nd ftruck
' him down, almoft fmothering him, for he was
'cruelly beaten and bruifed with their hands, bibles,
'and fticks. Then they haled him out, who was
'hardly able to ftand, and put him into the ftocks,
'where he fat fome hours: and they having brought
* horfe-whips, threatened to whip him. After fome
'itime they had him before the magiftrates, at a
* knight's houfe : who feeing how ill he had been
' ufed, fet him at liberty, after much threatening.
' But the rude multitude ,ftoned him out of the
' town.* Here was certainly turbiilence ; but I
ttfink the paffa^e not well adduced to prove it
upon Fox.
Refpefting Market Bofworth, Sewel gives this
fliort relation— r' Coming into the public pla'ce of
' worfhip, he fG. F.J found Nathaniel Stevcns-
« preaching, : who was prieft of the town where
' G. Fox was born ; here G. Fox taking occafion to
' fpeak, Stevens told the people he was mad, and
' that they fhould not hear hira ; though he had
' faid before to one colonel Purfoy, concerning him,
' that there was never fuch a plant bred in England.
« The people now being ft irred up by the prieft, fell
' upon G. Fox and-his fi.-iends, and ftoned thera out
* of the town.'
Maclaine's note at page 28 contains ^feveral parti
culars. The firft, about a naked woman, is men
tioned without authority. 1 fhall not take upon
me to determine whether it be manufaftured out-
of a ftory in Whitlock's memorials, of the preacher
in Whitehall being difturbed by a Quaker, whom
Cromwell ordered to be taken before a magiftrate.
The ftory about the man with a drawn fword, is
alfo m Whitlock; but my readers may ju^gc'

2i
whether he were one of a people who difclaim the
ufe of arras. As to T. Adams (Aldara, I beheve)
he appears, in foretelling the downfal pf Cromwell,
to have been a true prophet ;* and our own
accounts . of him mention both his denunciation
againft Ohver, and the manner ofit, by tearing his
own cap. The ftory alfo of the woman who went
into the parliament-houfe, is recorded by Sewel,
fpeaking of 1658 ; and the fpeedy accomplifhment
of her prophecy, feems to affix no ftigma on the
fociety which reckoned her among its membei-s.
Sewel doth not mention her name ; but fays fimply
this—-' A certain woman came once into the par-
' liament with a pitcher in her hand, which flie
;' breaking before them, told them, fo fhould they
'be broken to pieces ; which came to pafs not long
f after.'! But of all the perfons, who, under the
name of Quakerifm, have been, fuppofed to give
occafion for the outcry of fanaticifm, James Nayler
is to our detractors the favorite objeft of attack ;
and they feem to think the charge made good by
merely recurring to his name. But I believe if
we draw our account of Nayler from no better
authority than A. Maclaine's note, we fhall be at
fome lofs for what particulars to criniinate him ;
or to join with the annotator in pronouncing him
' the moft extravagant Quaker that appeared in
* this time.' He tells us (from Neal's hillory of the
Puritans, and from an account of Nayler's trial)
that Nayler was a man of parts, and fo much
admired by ' thefe fanatics' (meaning the Quakers)
that they blafphemoufly gave him fundry extrava
gant titles. He afterwards fpeaks of certain letters,
full of blafphemous abfurdity, written by Hannah
Stranger, Richard Fairman, and others ; and ^i^ thi^
* Sewel, 18;. flbid.

22
while he does not tell us a word of what poor
Nayler faid or did on the occafion. So that it would
feem that to be called by blafphemous titles is to
be more extravagant than to give thera. But the
faft is, both Nayler and his wild admirers were dif-
claimed by the Quakers. The latter indeed were
perfons of fo little note, that their names would
fcarcely have furvived to this time, but for the
injury which they did by their flattery to Nayler ;
whom Maclaine allows to have been a fenfible man,
and fome of whofe writings fhow him to have been
a meek one.*
The notes (r) at page 31, and (t) at page
32, relate to the charafter of Penn. What is
afferted in them, refpeffing his intimacy with
Peters the Jefuit, and his embaffy to Holland, is
drawn frora Burnett ; who is, I believe, the only
voucher for thera. With regard to his vanity, he
certainly feems not to have confulted it, when in
early fife he abandoned, for his religion, the
p^ti^onage . of the king's brother, heir, and the
high adrair^l of 'his realm. His ftile may yet be
judged of by his numerous -writings. I have
already touched, upon the account of Keith, and
fcarcely think it material to make any addition.
* For further particulars refpeaing James Nayler, fee his life
- annexed.

23

' SECTION IV-.
F O R M E Y.
THE mifreprefentations of Friends in Formey's
ecclefiaftical hiftory were rather diffufely' animad
verted on, feveral years ago, in an anonymous
pamphlet, entitled ' A Letter to Dr. Formey,'
printed for Nicoll, London, 1766;* and I be
lieve it will be found that many of the foregoing
remarks on the account given by Mofheim, krb
equally applicable-- to this author, whofe narrative
in great meafure feems to be taken from that pf
the leaifned profeffor.
The charge of turbulence on the charafter of
George Fox; the pretended origin of the Quakers'
tenets^ as drawn from thofe of the ancient Myftics ;
the accufing them of depreciating the Scripture?,
aud fome of them of making the incarnation of
Chrift no more than an allegory: the account of
their having perfons always prepa-i'ed to fpeak in
their ireligious affemblies ; and that they rejeft all
which may confer pleafure upon ^iSfe'; are f^atlacies
which I need not again refute. Biut there are a
few things, in that part of Formey's account which
relates to the rife and progrefs of the Society,
which do claim fome particular attention and reply.
He fays that the Quakers in the time oi" Charles I.
' dared to interrupt the pubhc Wbrfhip, and furioufly
' attacked thofe who celebrated it,' (p. 240, Vol. 2.
f^^glifh traaflation, London, D&vls, 1-766). The
• My oopy'is' the Second Edition.

^

B4

24
firft account we have of any perfon, aftferwarda
called a Quaker, interrupting a minifter in his,
fermon, is that mentioned by Maclaine, refpefting
George Fox at Nottingham.* ' This was in 1649,
as were the occurrences at Mansfield and at Bof-
worth. Charles I. was beheaded in 1648 ; and
the name of Quaker was impofed in 1650. It is
probable that .the words ' and furioufly attacked
'thofe who celebrated it,' may not have been in
tended to mean a perfonal affault ; but they con
vey, fuch a meaning, however adverfe to the prae-
tice of a people which Formey jiiftly reprefenfs
(page 245) as refufing, on anyoccafion, to fight-
' The order that Cromwell re-eftablilhed in the
' ftate,' continues Formey, ' repreffed the impetuo-
'- fity of thefe madiuen;> who, undei: the pretence (rf
.' obeying the Spirit, difregarded all laws, both
' divine and human. He found it neceffary to lay,
'.afide all lenity, and infli'fted the heayieft punifh-
*'t ments.' This, if tfue, would ; feem to IhoW
the opinion pf a cotemporary, and. Waiving his
political character, a perfon of no mean abilities,
refpefting th4 Quakers; but' it is far from truth.
During the Commonwealth, Friends were indeed
feverely perfccuted; but it was generally under the
pretence of yagrkncyj many of them being coht
cerncd to travel for .the promulgation of their
4o%ines ; and not by any new aA of -the parlia-
,ment, none having been made refpefting them; or
by any edift of Cromwell, for that was an autho
rity which hp did npt affume, On the -contrary,
although he is charged with conniving at, thofe
;reverities which he might have reftrained ; he him
felf far«bore any attempt to punifli, in cafes which
fell uqder Jiis immediate notice. Two of theift
* See Page ig to 15.

25
may ferve as inftances. Edward Burreugit, s moft^
zealous i preacher among Friends (who in the time
of Charles II. e^ded his days in prifon) Avrote. thuj
to Crom\yell in 1655 • ' That the Lord's contro-
' verfy was againft him, becaufe he had not beeii
' faithful in God's work; but that he had taken his
' reft and eafe upon a lofty :pountain of pride and
' v.ain glory, having fet up himfelf tobe worfhipped,
' and exalting his own horn, without giving glory
' and honour to God — that he had not performed
' bis VOW5 .made to the Lord. in the day of dif-
'• trefs; andihat now hqfiiffered grievous oppreffion,
' cruelty, arid tyranny, to be afted in his name, by
* unjuft imprifonments, and perfecution of the Lord's
' pfeoplei^ , That therefore the Lord would bring his
,' judgmisnts upon him, except he did repent.' * No
punifhmcnt to Burrough was confequent of this
bold remoaftrance — and it ; confirms my opinion
that CromweU was not perfonally rigorous to the
Friends of that day. They blamed him rathgr for
pot preventing, thanrfor inflifting, punifhment.
TTiofe who liave written concerning the Quakers
genially agree in giving to, George Fox, the prcr
eminence pf being the founder ofthe Spciety; and
there is little reafon to doubt that he was eonfidered
fuch by the nation at large, in 1654. Had Crom-
W'fll therefpre formed a. defign. of fuppr effing the
Friends, and had detcrm,ined to attempt it by th?
heavieft. puniftiments, hp fcaicely would have let
flip an opportunity of letting, die weight of his difr
pleafure fiall upon Fox : and ^he rather as he cer?
jainly had been an eminent pppofer of the minifters,
land was taxed with it by Oliver himfelf. Never-
.thelefs we firidhjm .on moft occafions ready to
gttend to the applications of Fox. In this year,
? Biirrough's Works, Folio, 97. Sewel, I Jl,

26
'Fox was taken up at Whetftonc in Leicefterfhlre,
as he was about to go to a meeting, hy fome
troopers of colonel Hacker's regiment. Thercwas
at that time fome talk of' a plot againft Cromwell;.
The colonel wifhed to perfuade G. Fox to remain
at home, and not to frequent meetings. With this
condition he refufed to comply, on which Hacker
fent hira a prifoner to the Prbteftor. The firft
cffeft of this arreft was a requifition on Oliver's
part; that Fbx fhould figp a paper, promifing not to
"take up a carnal Weapon againft him or the gov^-
hient, with a liberty for Fox to pot it in fuch
word? as he chofe. With this he complied, dif-
claiming the ufe of an outward weapon againft any
inan.*' Hb had (the fame day,T tjiink) an audience
of CrdmWell, the particulars of which are not to
our prefent purpofe, but the conclufion of it is re
markable. I give it in the -words of Fox ; and I
hope the account of .one who is efteemed the chief
of a'perfecmed people, may be tak6n in favour of
the man, of whbm they complain, for not ufing his
power; to reftrjiih the rage of their oppreffors.
* People coming in,* fays G. Fox (Journal, folio,
1694,! p. 138) 'I drew a little back; and as I
* was tuming he catched me by the hand,, and, with
* tears in his eyes, faid, " Coirte again to my houfe,
" for if thou ahd' I were but a,n hour of a* day
"together. We fhould be nearer throne to thp
"other;" adding that he wifhed nie no more ill
• than. he did to his own foul. I told hira, if he did,
* he wronged his own foul : and I Bid him hearkeli
* to God's voice, that he n^ighr ftand in his counfel
• and obey if;, and'^he did'fo, that would keep
* him frpm hardnefs of heart ; but if he did not hear
* God's voice, his heart would be hardened. And
^ See more on this fabjea under the head Encydopsedia.

27
* he faid it was true. Then I went out, and when
* captain Drury ("who had brought him to town
from Hacker, and was in Cromwell's guards)
* came out after me, he told me his lord proteftor
* faid I ' was at liberty, and might go whither I
* would!' Having difpatched the times of Cromwell, our
academician proceeds to inform us that the ' fuiy*
of the Quakers was foftened by degrees, and that
under the reign of Charles II. there was no fubjeSi
cf complaint againft them. Yet he tells us that the
king -was not well difpofed towards them, as they
refufed to take an oath on any occafion whatever.
Thefe fwo affertions do, not well accord with each
other, as they certainly do not with truth. The
legiflature in this r.ign, whether founded or not,
did complain of the Quakers, when it made a law
entitled ' An Aft for preventing mifchiefs and
* dangers that may arife by certain perfons called
« Quakers and others, refufing to take lawful oaths.*
They are alfo mentioned unfavourably in one or
both of the Afts in this reign for fupprefllng con
venticles. As to the king, it is probable that he troubled
fimfelf very little about them, except when parti
cular application was 'made to hira. On oue hand,
he gave his affent to the laws by which they were
perfecuted ; and on the other, he liftened to the
complaints of their grievances, which they pre
ferred to him: particularly in 1661, 'when he put
a ftop to the capital punifhraents which were
inffifted on them in New England; and in 1673,
when he releafed about foiir hundred who were
prifoners in Great Britain, by a pardon under the
Great Seal.* An account of this tranfaftion, and a
• See the Sumnjary, and Scweli in loft

28
copy of the pardon may be feen in George White-
head's Journal, entiried his Chriftian's Progrefs^
in which alfo are accounts of other inftances of the
perfonal civility of Charles 11. to the people called
Quakers. The check which the king gave to the
JJew England perfecutors, was at the inftance of
Edward Burrough, before' mentioned, to whom,
as well as to- feveral other, friends, he gave an
opportunity of conference with him. . ,
'It may not be neceffary to con tradift every
kffe-rtion which this author makes ; but I fliall juft
mention one more, relating to the civil conduft of
I'he Society, which is certainly erroneous. He fays
'.they never go to law, or take upon, themfelves
* any office of civil, fociety.' The faft is that, they
are reft'rained by the rules of their difcipUne, from
fulug each other at la\t, and enjoined to refer their
(differences to arbitration. If either party refufe to
comply with either of thefe regulations, or, having
complied, to abide by the award, the rules direft
that he fhall be difowned ; in which cafe the othcF
party is at hberty to purfue his remedy at law :¦
and members of this Society, as they are hable to
be, called into courts of law by their fellow fubje^sj
are certainly upiTlebarred their privilege, as Englifli,
men, of being plairitifls-; neither do they always
decline to exercife it,
" As to the other part of the affertion, they cer
tainly fill many offices of civil fociety, as truftees,
affignees, executors, guardians, arbitrators, mana
gers of public charities, and the like. If our
author means offices in parifhcs, wards, hundreds
and counties, m which they are lefs ¦ frequently
fouild than others^ it muft be, recollefted that
either the oath which is the admiffion to fqch
pfflces, or fomething to be performed in them incoiiv

29
fiftent with a Friend's fcruples, is the caufe of his
avoiding them; and not a defire to Withht>ld his fhare
of fervice from the community. When no fuch im
pediments fubfift, our Friends have not commonly
fliown fuch a difpofition to withhold their fervices ;
as appears by the ftations they often filled in the go
vernment of- Pennfylvania ; and, we not unfre
quently find them in this country in fome public
offices, piirtieularly in thofe of overfeer of the
poor, and furveyor of the high ways : and it pro-*
bably has been fo from their beginning, for our
writings, I think, mention inftances of their being
troubled when chofen to ofiices, before the affir
mation was legally current in any cafe. John
Whiting, one of, our early hiftorians, mentions
himfelf being an overfeer in 1679.*
From the firft appearance of eur Spoiety, nume-
rotis have been the afperfions cafts oil us by tliofe
of others. But I moft be allowed to fay that
much of the flander which we have fuffered, has
been either occafioned by inferenipes drawn by our
enemies from our acknowledged belief, which we
ourfelves by no means fubfcribe to ; or by urging
us on points not immediately xronnefted with bur
ihain doftrine', and concerning which the cxperieoce.
of many centuries has fho-wn that pious raen have
not been able to agree. Of the latter fort are the
clamours which have been raifed againft us' for
heterodox opinions concerning the Divine and the
human natures of Chrift, and the manner of their
union. By Formey we are faid to attribute to
Chrift a double body : firom what authority, as he
does not mention, . I cannot in-S^eftigate. But it
,,itu <, ¦ , ' : '¦ ¦'"'"::''¦
* ,Perfi:cution expofed in fome memoirs of rfie f jfFenngs of J. Whiting
and many others ofthe people tailed Quakers, in the weil of Englaqi^
12I5—— reprinted 1791. . ' . f

30
fiiould be remembered that the bbjeft of Friends*
dpftrinie (or to fpeak moSre in their own language
of their miffion) Was not to controvert or to eftab-*
lifh opinions onthofe points which had long, . and
(if we may judge from the Httle love that attended
the difcuffion), vainly, . occupied mankind ; ,but,
without denying the orthodox belief, whatever it
might be, to. turn men's attention to one, which
had been too much overlooked. The affirming
therefore of Chrift within, 'was in addition to the
behef of his, life and fufferings at Jerufalem ; and
certainly doth no more contain a denial of them, in
a greater or lefs degree, than the difcovery of
fome quality of fuperior excellence in any man,
would draw after it a belief that he had loft all
the excellence which we had allowed him to pof»
fefs 'before. With regard to the charge of our
undervaluing the Scripture, it has been ably, re
plied to by many of our authors, as it is by the
anonymous examiner of Formey already mentionedk
Thefe remarks may ferve as a caution to the
reader, againft taking on truft what he mky find
il:ated by various authors, as Quaker-principles,
when they do not refer to acknowledged writings-
of our own : and with this, after I have obviated
one more affertion, I fhall take my leave of Formey.
He fays (p. 244) that the Quakers ' allow that
* a man cannot poffefs this light, unlefs he mortifies
* the flefh, and weakens the power of his fenfes.' I
think this is Monkery, and not Quakerifm. They
affert with the Scripture, "that the fight fliineth
*' in darknefs," and faythat it not only difcovers the
fins of the flefh, but gives power to fubdue them.
According to Formey, a man muft firft overcome
all, his evil propenfities.; and fo, as it is the pro
vince of Chrift " to deftroy the works of the devil,'*

3i
be in fome fort, and primarily, his own Saviour;
and then he will receive the heavenly vifitant.
Not fo fay the Quakers', or the Scripture. What
was Paul, before he was Enlightened? A perfe-
cutor. What was Felix, when he trembled with
conviftion ? A lafcivipus Genetile.

32
.r . ¦ .. '.
SECTION V.
.??HIlME.'
IT is difficult to give a fcrious refutation of an
account in which truth and falfehood, jeft and fe-
rioufnefs, are fo blended as they are in that which
Hume gives of our religious fociety, in his Hiftory
of England. I had therefore put together a few
jocofc remarks on it, as the propereft anfwer to
fuch a motley performance. But feeing religion
itfelf is not a proper fubjeft for a jeft, fo neither is
he, who is fo far miftaken as to joke with its pro
feffors. I therefore deftroyed my effay, and now
propofe briefly to fhow how inadequate Hume was,
in the rallying temper he affumed, when he daflied
out his account of the Quakers, to give fuch a
hiftory of a people who were his cotemporaries,
as fhould add credit to his recital of events long pafl.
His account of George Fox is feafoned with diat
kind of hyperbole, which gives a relifh to light
difcourfe ; but doth not bear the ftrifteft inqmiry,
or furnifh the trueft information. So that when hb
at once fays the Quakers began with the loweft
vulgar, and had George Fox, a ftioe-maker, for their
founder, that Fox long wore leather for the fake
of fingularity, and never dwelled a moment in a
place, we may pafs thefe and other flourifhes as
figures of his rhetoric, and proceed. But when
he tells us, that all the ceremonies which were in
vented by pride and oftentation, were rejefted by
Fox and his difciples, from motives of fuperior
pride and oftentation, we may queftion his power

, S3
ofpefletfating mto their motives, and withhold our
affent. His account of the origin of tht name Quaker,
is not that which the Society itfelf hath handed
down to it; fee the ' Summary,' nor doth his ac
count of their fury in breaking into churches (as
they are termed), well agree with what he acknow
ledges of their patience under fufffcring. That they
crept into the array after they joined our fociety,
I believe to be untrue. That feveral of the early
Friends had been in it, is true : alfo that fome, pro-
bahly whilft in it, received their doftrinfcs. But as
the laying afide bf arms was their conftant praftice,
it is more probable that they left it as foon, as they
could.* The following are grofs inaccuracies.
Hume might not, poffibly, know better; but a
writer who neglefts to procure- the information
which he might eafily obtain, deferves the lefs
excufe for his ignorance. ' Each rqfe up in his
• place (viz. in their meetings), and delivered the
• extemporary infpirations of the Spirit.' Again,
* Soinetimes a great many preachers were moved
' to fpeak at once.'
The ftory of the fafting Quaker is cited from
Whitlock, who reports it, like a newfpaper, as in
telligence from Colchefter, in 1655. This was the
year in which, according to Sewel, James Parnel
died, in the caftle there, of ftieer ill ufagej to pal
liate whofe cruel treatment, it was given out that
he had injured himfelf by fafting, and afterwards
by immoderate eating. I will not affirm that the,
ftory was made out of this ; but there feems
enough in this, for it to pick up the reft by the
* Several, however, remained in the army until Cromwell, in 1654, re
quired an oath of them, when, on their refufal, they' were diftanded.
Sewel, Book 3, beginning.

*l^ay from Colchefter to Whitehall. The other ftory
of the naked female is already fpoken to, under the
head, Moflieim. I have there alfo touched upon
James Nayler's cafe, but having endeavoured to give
it a ..particular elucidation,* it may now be left,
with remarking, that it doth not appear he ever
did fanty himfelf transformed into Chrift, and be
come the Saviour of the world ; and that Nayler
himfelf, as well he might, denied the ftory of raifing
Dorcas Er^bury frora the dead ; and further, that
if <his unworthy Dorczs fwore that he had done it,
it may ferve to fhow in fome degree what fort of
people they were who led James Nayler afidc>
feeing genuine Quakers refufe to fwear. ,, >
# 5ee the life annexed^

35
SECTION vr.
THte ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA.
I DO not know that the editors of the Eficy-
clopffidia Britannica can be reckoned mifreprefentors
of the foGJety of Friends ; for they candidly extraft
from the "^ Summary,', already mentioned, our
own, account of our peculiar tenets ; but they pre
face this account with fo unpleafaiit a charafter of
George Fox, as is not likely to give their readers
mtuch predeliftion for a body, of which he is faid
to be the founder. Iu our own language, howr
ever, we chufe to call him fimply the firft. The
determined pppofitioii which G. Fox gave to fome
of the religious and civil praftic'es .of the nation,
has raade it current to charge him with faiiaucifm
and turbulence ; and the evident deficiency of
Ijunian learning, which is every where to be ob
ferved in his -writings, have occafioned the outcry
againft him to be mixed with ftrains of contempt.
In this : cry our Encydopaedifts have joined ; or
rather, after it had fubfided, they have raifed it
agajn : from what motives they fhould kno-w beft >
but probably not to recommend the hiftory of a
people which they defcribe as compofed of rational
beings ; and on which, in fame inftances, they
beflpw their commendations. It falls out, how
ever, very well for the memory of George Fox,
that they have not beeu contented to calumniate
him in general terms ; but for proof have adduced
- ttvo charges from: books which bear his name* aaid
C 2

one from a manufcript letter, faid to be written by
hira to Oliver Cromwell.
Let us then examine the vahdity of the fources
from which their information is drawn : and to this
inveftigation they themfelves furnifh a clue, by
faying they have received it from the ' theological
« works of Mr. Leflie.'
It may not be much amifs, at fetting out, to ex
amine what fort of a man this Leflie was ; for we
fliall find that one of the charges will principally
reft on his candour and veracity. He was, at tjic
lime he became ah anonymous champion ¦ for the
\ Epifcopalians againft the Quakers, a nonjuring
clergyman, in the reign of King William: and one
cannot indeed wonder that he did not fike fuch' a
mild pritice; for he fays, (Reply to Angliis Flagel-
latus, p. 330.) fpeaking, of the reign of Queea
Elizabeth^ and her perfecution of the Anabaptifts,
* There was an age when fome zeal was fhewn
* agaiiift them. The 24th November, 1538,' four
• Dutch Anabaptifts bare faggt^s at Paul's crofs,
• and the 27 th November, two Dutch Anabaptifts
• were burnt in Smithfield.' And fo he goes oU «o
recount how four more were burnt in thefe zealous
times; and that at length, the queeji commanded
the whole fchifmatic corps to depart the realm in
twenty days, upon pain of imprifonraent and for
feiture of goods and chattels. He docs not even
tell us of an aft of parliaraent ; ' But,' he goes on,
* when thefe guards (i. e. faggots, fire, aiid baniffi-
* ment,) were taken away,/and the Dutch toleration
• was made a precedent for the EngUfli reformation,
* in the grand fchifra and rebelHon of 41, thefl the
« flood gates of the infernal pit being fully fet operi,
* the fun and the air were foon darkened with the
• fiaoke'(i.e.diffeaters.J I pafs by fome further anala-

37
gous epithets, and haften to the confequence, vi^hich
he fays>was, that ' the monfter came to its full growth
* of deformity in the Quakers-*' Which, though it was
' ferroweti in Holland, and fent to be nurfed in Eng-
* land, was begot by Rome. For John 'Bdccold, ther
' tailor iof Leyden, or John Matthias, the baker of
' Harlem, and other mechanicks, who ledthe daace
* in Dutch land, were as incapable: of'themfelveSi to?
* have broached thefe herefies, asour cobler G. Fox,
* and other rafcally vermin, tinkers,, tailors, and
* fidlers, who danced after their pipe. here.* In
thefe quotations, I have not intentionally added or
difplaced a word; and have only . omitted for
brevity's fake, where the context was; more fwelled
with intolerance, or abufe,- than is neceffary for
our; purpofe. Here then we percteive that Charles
Leflie was what is called a high churdhman, aii
approi^erlof perfecution, and, I think I may add,
without abbfe of words, a virulent oppofer pf the
Quakers, u It appears .therefore that we are to
receive' what, he fays with raany grains of doubt:
and one would wonder that the • editors in this
pofite and enhghtened" age, fhould accept his
teftiraony.- - ' , ,
They have however drawn forth from the- mud
of hasqpage,' three, charges againft George ^Fox^
with ';which^ they prefent us, as if they -were un-
aflfwerable: and here I may again, .obferve, that it
is the- duty of thofe who undertake to affert upon
the word of an' ejiemy, not to omit to inquire if
nothjng>;hasibeen, or can be, faid on the other
fide.'irfj 2;r'..' ' .-..•
TheiiDft charge is -this : ' In a book called, News
out of- the ^Norihi (pagQ: 1.5) he fays of himfelf,
^' I am the door that ever;?was, the fam0 GJirifl:
" yeftfefd^yilbr^y, and for evet,''. Thus .tho Ency-
C3

38
clopffidia. To refute this charge, it is only nepeffary
to recite the paffage as it ftands in the book itfelf,'
printed in 4to. 1654. '¦ '
' Now to all dear; ones I fpeak. The 'fame feed
' (which is Chrift), the fame fpirit, takes upon it
' now as ever was. The fame world is now as
* ever was. The fahie temptations and the fame
< devils, and the (ame worffiip ofthe world, twining
^intb another form and colour. And Jefus" Ch-rift
* is the way, the truth, and the life. He is the
? dpoV that all muft pafs thro', and he is the
* porter that opens it. I am the jfame door that
* ever was: the farae Chrift to-,day, yefterday, and
* for ever.* John ix. 6. Ibid. x. 13. Luke xi. 4. ¦
After obferving that the references to John and
Luke, are taken frora the margin of George Fox'4
book, (which is printed in fo indiftinft a manner,
as would at this time fcarcely be admitted), I think
We may pafs to the next charge^ which ftands
thus: ' In the intrdduftion^to his ' Battledoor for
* Teachers and Profeffors, he fays, '* All lan-
*' guages are to me no more thari duft, who was
*' before languages were."
It may be premifed, before I endeavour to clear
up tlds paffage,^ which I am wiUing to confefs is a
likely one to occafion; cenfvire, that the popular
expreffion, George Fox's Batdedoor, is inaccurate
(* his Battledoor,' fay our editors). Let us hear
-What Fox himfelf fays of it (Journal, 8vo. vol. i.
p." 245. ift edit. . 1694), '- John Stubbs and
* Benjamin Furly took great pains in the compiling
' of it, which I put them upon ^ and fome things I
'added to it.' Hedbes hot fay whichi parts he
added^ and hd hais npt (that appears by my copy)
fignisd ihe introtiuftion; though he was general! y{as
vire may fliortly fee) Uberd of his 0.i"5> Jfhe fen-

39
tence in the handle of almoft every battledoor,
has his name j and they are . about fifteen or
fixteen in number. The fentence he figns is fimply
this, ' The light which Chrift hath enlightened
' you withal, believe in ; that the anointing within
' you, you may know to teach yod.' It is already
granted that the expreffion in queftion is liable to
exception ; but I think when we conftrue it by the
context, the faireft way of interpreting that which
is obfcure in the writings of deceafed authors, fome
of the difficulty ceafes. It fliould be remembeircd
that the main tenet, on which George Fox and his
friends infifted, was the infinite fuperiority of the
Spirit to the letteri The learned of that day, as
of other times, valuing themfelves on their know
ledge of languages, defpifed our Friends for their
ignorance ; thefe in return frequently decried
human learnings to a degree in which, probably,
they would not have flighted it, if they had not
thought it, to be fet too much in competition with
the knowledge of divine things, which they be*
lieved the foul to receive by immediate internal com-
Tnunication with the Mediator, Chrift. * All lan-
' guages' fays a * writer in this introduftion, ' are to
' me no more than duft, who was before languages
' were.' He immediately goes on, ' and am come'd
' before languages were, and am redeemed out of
' languages into the power -where raen fliall agree :.
' but this (meaning the battledoor) is a whip and a
* rod (alluding to the correftion of children") to all
' fuch who hav? degenerated through the pride and
' ambition from their natural tongues and lan-
< guages, and all languages upon the earth is but
¦^ natural, and makes none divine, but that which
* f h? Intto^uiftjo^ dq^ not appear to be all writtea by one han^
9 4

40
* makes divine is the word, which was before
* languages and tongues were.'
Such is the paragraph which fo much offended
the orthodox Leflie. I cannot probably prove
that it was not written by Fox ; on the other hand,
I prefume that, none of his opponents can prove
that it was. I finifli the fubjeft with mentioning and
remarking on a note which a perfon, who had been
perufing this introduftion, and who appears to
have thought Fox the author of -the paffage in
queftion, fixed into the copy in his poffeffion.
*,I have. here taken the liberty to make a fup-
* plement to G. F's elliptical paragragh: as Ma-
'¦ lachi Hi. ID. "All languages are to rae no more
" than duft," being come to him " who was before
" languages were, and am corae'd" to the power
" which was " before languages were ; and am re-
*' deemed out of languages into the power where
" men ftiall agree," &c. This, by high church
men, will be thought a lame way of bringing off the
writer of the introduftion ; and therefore the anno
tator reminds fuch, that as great a liberty appears
to be taken with their Bibles. The latter part of
verfe lo of the 3d of Malachi runs in Englifh thus:
" if I will not open you the windows of
*' heaven, and pour you out a bleffmg, that there
*' fhall not be room enough io receive it." Now omit
the words in Italics, and it runs thus, " and pour you
*' out a bleffrag that not enough." In Mark xiii.
34. the tranflators have prefixed " For the Son tf
*' Man is :" words which even the Englifli text doth
not feem to want ; for I fuppofe no one will tell us
that Mark in his original copy inferted the marks
of parenthefis in the 35th verfe, in which is a
proper antecedent to the word " he" in the 36th,
The reader will alfo find a notable Italic addiiioa

41
to I John ii. 23. If then fuch liberties may be
taken with the Scriptures, v?hich, fay our opponoits,
are the word of God, I think they muft not refufe
us the privilege of explaining, by fimilar means, the
writings of a more modern teacher, be he faint or
cnthufiaft.

48

SECTION VIL
THUS far, though we follow Leflie in the maze
of calumny, we have this to guide us — the ori-
> ginal editions of the works to which he refers ; but
in his ne^it charge, we muft take his word. That
IS, we muft admit a prieft of a perfecuting fpirit to
be impartial evidence againft a diffenter ; and an
affertor of the divine right of tithes, * againft one
who ftruck at their root. For the Encyclopsedifts
copy their third charge from Leflie only, in whofe
works, fay they, ftands a letter from George Fox
to the prbteftor, containing the following expref
fions. ' 1, who am of the world called G. Fox,
'doth deny the carrying or drawing any carnal
' fword againft any, or againft thee, O. C. or any
• man, in the prefence of the Lord I declare it,
• God is my-witnefs, by whom I am moved to give
' this forth for the truth's- fake, from him, whom
* the world calls G. Fox, who is the Son of God,
* who is fent to ftand- a witnefs againft all violence,
' and againft, the works of darknefs, and to turn
' the people from darkpefs to light, and to bring
* them from, the occafion ofthe war^ and from the
^ occafion of the magiftrates fword, which is a terror
' to the evil doer, which afts contrary to the light of
^ the Eofd Jefus Chrift.' They quote raore of the '
letter, but, I think, this contains all their charge
of blafphemy ; for though they have marked with
Italic, further on in the letter, the words ' my king-
' dovi (meaning the kingdom I am of) is not of this
' worlci ; ' as they are no more than any redeemed
• L-llie wrote a boo^c on the Divine Right oJ Tithes,

43
mind may fiiy, I think we raay let that pafs withoiit
rerifark. r Now as iLeflie's is the only copy of this letter
jirctended to be extant, that I khow of, let us ex-
anfine how he came by it. He fays, he faw it in a
manufcript of one Humphry Norton, which manu
fcript was printed at London, * for fo' fays' Leflie,
' I find it quoted in a book of Roger Williams's,
' called, " The Great Fox dug out of his Burrow."
Of Humphry Norton there is but one book
extant, or mentioned by John Whiting, ' in his
catalogue of Friends books, printed 1708. It
relates, I think, wholly to New-England, and was
printed in 1659. I have fearched in vain for this
letter and its atteftation. It muft be noted that
Williams' book was printed in New-England, and
as k may be faid that Whiting fuppreffed fome other
books of Norton's, from his catalogue, I woul4
add that Whiting does infert imapproved publica
tions, and that Leflie has not given tl^e/ title of
NortcMi'sbook, which he fays he faw in manufcript^
and which Williams is faid to quote. For Williams*
I have alfo fearched in vain; though Friends
library has a part of a copy, containing not more
than the title and fome introduftion. Such thea
.are the grounds on which Leflie would have us
believe that George Fox wrote fuch a letter : an4
"Whether it be likely that he, a writer even of this
century, ever faw a C^ak^r-manufcript of the time
of Cromwell, which was afterwards printed, let
the reader judge. ,
It may now be feafonable to mention the occafio^
on which j in 1654^ Fox did write a lettei- of fome
kind to- the proteftor. We fliall then" have his
own, and Leflie's account of the affair, before us,
and may judge of ?he prgbabJUty of its containing

44
blafphemy : and I truft that even if it ffiould be
concluded that he did write exaftly as Leflie fays
he did (which is not granted) that he might do
fo, and not blafpheme. If the letter be a forgery,
the charge falls ; and even if it be genuine, I think
jt may be fliown, from Fox's ftile on other occa
fions, that the fenfe which Leflie, and, after him, our
Encyclop^difts, have given to it, is not neceffarily
to be inferred from the words which they quote.
I believe it is not difputed by any one, -that the
occafion of George Fox's wridng to Cromwell,
was to fatisfy hira that he was not a perfon likely
to oppofe his government, by taking up arms. ^ Fox
had been apprehended at Wheftonc in Leicefter-
fliire, as he was about to go to a meeting, on
account, as it fhould feem, of the report of a plot
againft Cromwell.* Being apprehended, he was
examined by colonel Hacker, who took fome pains
to. perfuade him to ftay at home, and not to hold
meetings. , Ou his refufing to engage to do fo,
Hackej fent him to the proteftor by captain Drury.
Drury alfo on the way endeavoured to prevail? on
him to remain at home. AU however being inef-
feftual, he was brought to an inn at Charing Crofs,
where Drury informed him that the proteftor re
quired him to promife, ' not to take up a carnal
• fword or weapon againft him, or the government
* as it then was,' and. that he fhould write it in his
own terms, and fign it. The words of George
Fox's journal are thefe: (Edit. i. p. 137.) 'I
' faid little in reply to captain Drury, but the next
* morning I was moved of the Lord to write a paper
* to the proteftor, by the name of Oliver Cromwell,
• wherein I did, in the prefence of the Lord, declare,
' that I did deny the wearing or drawing' of a carnal
• Thi« cjrcumftance is mentioned under the head, fonnej%

45
* fword, or any other outward weapon againft hira,
* or any man. And that I was fent of God to ftand
* a witnefs againft all violence, and againft the works
' pf darknefs, and to turn people from the darkne&
' to the light, and to bring thera frpm the occafion
' of war and fighting, to the peaceable gpfpel ; and
' from being evil-doers, which themagiftrate's fword
* fhould be a terror to. When I had written what
*¦ the Lord had given me to write, I fet my name
' to it, and gave it to captain Drury, to give to
' O. Cromwell, which he did.' It follows, in Fox's
journal, that Cromwell, on receiving the letter,
fent for hira, fpent forae time with him in friendly
difcourfe, and not only gave him liberty, but di-
Tefted.that he fhould dine at Whitehall. This has'
no appearance of the proteftor's thinking that Fox
had ufed blafpheraous expreffions. '
The Encyclopasdifts,in a note, fay, ' That Mr.
• Leflie's copy is authentic, is thus attefted by two
' of the friends who fa-w Fox deliver it to the
' proteftor's meffenger. " We are witneffes to this
" tefliiiioriy, whofe names in the flefh are, Thomsis
" Aldara, Robert Craven." How thefe names,
which fubfift as atteftatioiis only in Leflie's book, or
which at moft the editors only drew from thence,
can authenticate this book, or any part of it, is to
me a parodox ; but I mendon it for the fake of
«:6mparing it with what Fox fays in his journal,
p. 140. ' T. Aldara and- R. Craven (-who had
'been fhe:riff of Lincoln), and divers -friends,
* came up td London after me;' but A. Parker abode
* with me.' It is to be fure poffible that Aldara and
Craven might come, time enough, to fee hira give
his paper to Drury; but as 'it appears to have
been delivered before the early- dinner hour of
thofe days, on .the morrow of his. arrival, it does
uot feem probable that they had arrived in time.

<

46
By this time the reader may have formed a
judgment whether Fox did really believe himfelf
the Son of God or npt ; that is, whether he be
lieved himfelf to be Jefus of Nazareth; for ia
order to convift him of the blafphemy for- which
he is indifted by Leflie, we muft believe that this
was his clear apprehcnfioti : and as it is too abfurd
to be fuppofed of a man who conftantly mentions
-Chrift in the third perfon, I believe we muft acquit
him. At the fame time it muft be acknowledged
that the inaccuracy- of his ftile may occafion his
meaning to be mifunderftood ; for if we cpnftrue
his writings, or poffibly thofp of his time, by the
ftrift rules of grammar, we fhall certainly fail in the
difcovery of their import. FpX; was a man rapid
in thought, and often feemed to infert an idea juft
as it occured, without obferving its referencci or
conneftion with his context. The following are a
,few inftances, ' And we fay that Chrift is corae, a
' priefthood after the order of Melchifedech, the
' fimilitude and likenefs, who ends the fimifitude and
' fikenefs,' (a) The relative, fay our graiiimars, re
fers to the neareft antecedent, which is Melchife
dech; but George Fox, who probably knew nothing
cf relative and antecedent, certainly meant that
Chrift was the end of fimifitudes. Again, fpeaking
to the priefts, ' Ye have had a fhop that inwardly
' ravened ;' (b) that is, ye, that inwardly ravene4>
have had a fhop. To raven, feems to have been a
verb underftood by Fox and his opponents, mean
ing greedy defire and departure firom the feeding
of Chrift. Again, ' This (i. e. the light) lets us
* fee the Scriptures in their place, and the fiilfillintg
• of thcmj which was given forth to be believed,
* pra^fed, read, and fulfiJiled.' (c) , Here both the
* Great Myftery, p. 69, * lb. 70. « lb. 70.

47
relative ivhkh, and the verb fipgular kvah according
to ftrift conftruftion, refer to fulfilling i but G- Fox
meant the Scrjpiureh Ohce more, frbin the fame
book, ' God breathed into man the breath df lift,
' and he became a living foul, who h.atli| all fouls in
' his hand, and the foul is immartal, and tlHrift the
* bifhop of it is iramortal^ and God hath it in his
* hand which goeth againft hira that doth^ evil,
' whofe hand is immortal.^ (d) This, according to
Lefliean conftruftion, would denote that man hath
all fouls in his hand, and that the hand of the evil
doer is iramortal. I will mention a paffage from
another of his books^ viz. Saul's Errand to Damaf-
cus, p. 5. ' And where the works of G od are now,
* they think them ftrange things now, as was then,
' who are alive in the flefh.' Take one example
more frora4iis mouth, fpoken on his trial at Lan-
cafter. ' It is God and Chrift that fanftifieth ; and
' the faints are all one in the Father and the Son,
' they are of his bone and of his flefh, Ephef. v. 30.
' And the Father and the Son are one, and they are
* the fons of God.' According to grammar, the
latter ihey refers to the words Father and Son, Which
would make nonfenfe. It may be obferved, that
George Fox had been charged with faying* that, he
was equal with God ; but on this examination he
was difcharged. Here then we have Fox's ftile ;
and by it let us examine the letter in queftion, pre
tended or authentic. ' I am moved to give this
* forth for the truth's -fake, from him whom the
' world calls G. Fox, who is the fon of God,' &c.
Let who refer to him truth ; and all is orthodox, ac
cording to John xiv. 6. "I am the way, the truth,
** and the life." And if any will ftill objeft that the
following member ' who is fent to ftand a witnefs,*
* Great Myftery, p. 337.

48
which in the Journal Is confeffed to relate to Fox,
proves that the preceding one doth alfo ; the fore
going quotation from Saul's Errand to Damafcus,
will fhow this not to be a neceffary confequence j
and alfo fhow the alternate, though certainly incon-
fpicuous, manner, in which Fox arranged his ideas^

49
SECTIOT^ vm.
WESLEY. '
IN the year 1782 was publiiflied a:coiicife eccle
fiaftical hiftory, from the birth , of Chrift to the
beginning of the prefent century (the i8th); with
out an author's name, but univerfally attributed to
the celebrated John Wefley ; and foldj as the title
imports, ' at the Rev. Mr, iWefley's preaching-
' houfes in town and country.' In this, of cour/e,
is a hiftory of the Quakers. No man could, be
more conveniently fituated for obtaini/ig authentic
information refpefticig them ithan John Wefley*
He then lived in London, fo far as his plan of iti
nerancy permits us to call any place his abode ;
and as the metropolis contains fo large a numbe|-
of the people which he was about, to de/cribe,; !<:
wcJuld have been natural and eafy fpr hira to have
matie application to fome of them, for reference to
fuch documents as .might furniflj him with the beft
materials for .his hiftory : referving ftill to himfelf
¦the privilege of putting his own couftruftion on
the informadon which he might obtain. "Ye.t he
H-oes not appear to ha-ve taken any ftepof this kind ;
but to have contented himfelf with retailing the
page of Mofheim.
There is therefore fcarcely any thing mentioned
by Wefley, to which the remarks I have- made on
the correfponding place of Mofheira are not appli
cable. In general, the very words of Maclaine's
iranflatirai are ufed. On one of thgfe word?, as
we go along, I. will make a ffiort reraark. In
1647, George Fox, it is faid, began tOj<?ris// through
D

50
fcVci-al counnes in England.* (Vol. 4, p. 128.)
Without ftaying long to inquire whether to firoll
be a good traiiflation ofthe Ladn ^ox& _percurro* ,
tifcd by Mofheim, it feems an -unhappy term for
Wefley to have given, to the praftice of travelUng
for the purpofe of religious inftruftion. Accordingly
We do not fiiid him ufing it in the defcription of his
©wn long, painful, and I am willing to add, ufeful,
travels in the work of awakening finners.
Although, the fource of Wefley's Information
being thus fhown, it may be the lefs needful to fay
much, by way of animad verfion, on his account ;
yet one paffage, forming a note in Mofheim, but
transferred to his text by Wefley, may claim our
fekaroinalion ; particularly as it relates to a work
much efteemed, not by the Quakers only, but, I be
lieve, by the pubfic in general, or by that part of it
which pays attention to theological writings. The
reader may eafily guefs I am fpeaking of Barclay's
Apology. The credit of this book, it is attempted
to invalidate, by obferving that Barclay ' has intler-
* preted and modified the opinions of his feft after
* the manner of an advocate, who undertakes the
' defence of a bad caufe.' ' In the firft place, he
* obferves an intire filence in reladou to thofe funda*
' mental principles of Chfiftianity, concerning which
' it is of great confequence to know the real opinions
' of the Quakers; and thus exhibits a fyftem of
' theology, that \i evidently lame and imperfeft.'t
What thofe' fundamental poirits are, we are not
informed by either of the learned hiftoriahs. Let
«s then examine for ourfelves whether Barclay doth
not- clearly fet forth the foundation of Chriftianity,
or whether his fyftem be lame and defeftivci " Im'
• AnglisB quafdam provihcias percnrrebati
4 Wefley, Vol. I V.p 13J; andMoJheim'aXr.STo. 1768. p. 36,»ote.

51
45ing this, let us bear in mind the nature of his
Apology. It is not an apology for tenets which all
GhriftiahS hold in comraon. Thefe want no apo
logy. But its intent is to fliow the confiftency of
our Friends' pecuUar tenets with the Gofpel ; the
harraony of their ftrufturcj with the foundation,
and corner ftone, on which they profefs to build.
The Firft Propofition of Barclay, being fliort, I
fhall tranfcribe it, and then let the reader judge of
his deficiency in difplaying the fou'ndation of the
Chriftian religion;
Prop. L ' Seeing the height of all happinefs
' is placed in the true knowledge of God (this
* is life eternal, to know Thee the only true God,
* And Jefus Chrift, whom thou haft fent), the true
' and right underftanding of this foundation and
* ground of knowledge, is that which is moft necef-.
' fary to be known and believed in the firft place.*
The generality of the profeffors pf Chriftianity
maintain that this knowledge is to be obtained frora
the Scriptures ; but the Quakers, by Immediate
Revelation: accordingly Barclay, -with perfeft con
fiftency, as a fkilful advocate j defirous of leading
his reader the fhorteft and fimpleft road to the prin
ciple he wanted to recommend, makfes Immediate
Revelation the fubjeft of his Second Thefis.
Prop. II. ' Seeing no man,' fays Barclay, quoting
Chrift hirafelf, ' knoweth the Father but the Son,
* and he to whom the Son revealeth him ; and
' feeing the revelation of the Son is in and by the
* Spirit; therefore the teftimony of the Spirit is
* that alone, by which the true knowledge of God
* hath been, is, and can be, , only revealed,' &^.
This is a longer Propofition: I therefore forbear
.to tranfcribe the whole.
» 3

5^
It is now natural for th,e mere fcripturian to a/k.
In what eftimation doth this people hold the Bible?
Barclay anticipates the inquiry, and in his Third
Thefis treats of Scripture. ' From thefe revelations
' ofthe Spirit of God to the faints, have proceeded,'
fays he, ' the Scriptures of truth;' of Xvhich hefum-
marily defcribes the contents; ^iid adds, 'Neverthc-
' lefs they are only a de<:laration of the fountain, and
' "not the fountain itfelf; therefore they are not to
' be -efteemed the principal ground of all truth and
' knowledge;' with more to the fame effeft. Had
Barclay flopped here, it is not clear to nie that he
would' have formed a lame fyftem ; but he goes on,
and , launches out into other difquifitions : treating
in his Fourth Thefis of the Condition of Mari
in "the Fall. The fubjeft of the Fifth and Sixth, is
the Univerfal Redemption by Chrift; and tht
Savitig and Spiritual Light wherewith every Man
Is enlightened. In thefe the Dofti'ine of Repro
bation is tranfiently, though ably, arraigned. Jufti-
fication employs the Seventh, and Perfeftion the
Eighth. The Ninth treats of Ferfeverance, and
¦the poffibility of falling from 'Grace.. ' Minrftry,
Worfhip, Baptifm, and the Gommu-nfens take up
the Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth,, and Thirteenth;
and the remaining two fpeak of Civil ConduA.
' With this brief outline of the Apology (or rather
ofthe Thefes, of which it i& a defence): in out
view; let us proceed with our hiftorians. It is ob-
¦-fervable,' fay they, ' in the fecond place, that
' Barclay touches in a flight, fuperfickl, and hafty
' manlier, "fome tenets, which, when amply ex-
' plained,' had expofed the Quakers to cenfure.*
Here again' w'c are left in the dark with refpeft to ttte
tenets alluded to ; and muft therefore endeavour to
difcover for ourfelves wlikt had beenfo obnoxious to

53
reproach. We know that theii- exalting the^pffiee
ofthe inward light,, and their making ofthe facreq.
writings only a fubordinate, rule, have occafioned
their enemies, to fay that they denied the Scrip
tures. We know alfo that their dlfiife of Baptifiij
with water, and of .,bfead and wine in communion,
have caufed it to be faid that they denied the ordi
nances of God : and that "whatever fliare their
uncomplimentary manners had in O'ffending the
pride and felf-love of their neighbours, thofe three
points have laid tliem the moft open of any to cen
fure- Neverthelefs to each of thofe points, Robert
Barclay has allotted a feparate Thefis, and its corre{-
j)onding ejcplanation, defepce, and proof. ' Laftly,*
fays Wefley, continuing to ufe the words of
Mofheim, ' he employs the greateft dexterity and
• art in foftening and modifying thofe invidious
' doftrines, which he cannot conceal ; for whicli
' purpofe he -avoids all thofe phrafesthat are made
' ufe of by the Quakers, and are peculiar to their
' feft, and expreiTes their tenets in ordinary lan-
' guage, in terms 'of a vague and indefinite -nature,
'and iu a ftile that cafts 'a, fort of malk over their
' natural afpeft. At this rate, the moft enormous
' errors may be held with impunity; for there is
' no doftrine however abfurd, to which a plaufible
' air may not, be giveq, by following the infidious
' method of^ Barclay.'
This is indeed a fingular charge; yet .fome, of
its /extraordinary ; inconfiftency might indeed dif-
appear, could it be proved that the terms of
Barclay were vague and indefinite. On the con--
feary,.;his terms, by which I fuppofe it to be
underftood the words which he ufes, are, I think it
"will be allowed, as fimple, clear, and definue, as
thofe of any author: and he has this advantage

54
above others, that as he wrote his Apolpgy in
Latin and Englifli, each text is to be eonfidered as
an original ; and each is an undeniable comment
on the other ; and may ferve for the clearing up
of any ambiguity that may unintentionally be in
the work.* A few unufual words occur, which I
have apprehended to be either Scotdcifms, terms
current in theology in the laft century, pr terras
framed by the author to fuit his own purpofe ; but
thefe are generally of obvious meaning.
The terms of Barclay being, then, cleared frora
the imputation pf ambiguity, it feems ftrange to fay,
that, becaufe he wrote' in ordinary language, his
method is infidious; and that his ftile cafts a veil
over the natural afpeft of the Quakers' tenets,
In faft, Barclay rather removed the veil, which
many of the phrafes ufed by the earlier writers had
taft over th? afpeft of the truths which they held.
Many of them were men who had never converfed
much with the le-arned world ; and their ftile was
of confequence unformed. After their converfion
to Quakerifm, they chiefly converfed with one ano
ther, and terms expreffive of their feelings natu
rally fprung up, and became current among them,
¦which a more intimate acquaintance with the
powers of language might have fliown to be as
unneceffary, as they were ^ obfcure to common
readers. The complexion, too, of the times ad
mitted, and even favoured, on religious fubjefts, a
fort of language, which is not now thought to be
ufeful or pertinent, But Barclay, by his better
acquaintance with language in general; with other
languages than his vernacular one, and whh th%
* I take this opportunity of noticing an error of the prefs, wliich rur.s
through feveral Editions of Barclay's Apology,; Propofition viii. § 2,
^vifio^ 4—' Good and holy men who have not arrived to everlaiUng Ufa/
piRit t;he word, mt. I^itin, ' Qui vitam eternani adepti funt,' '

55
manners of men of other countries, had not con-
trafted the peculiarities of a more confined educadon ;
' and therefore explained the principles of onr friends
in a way that expofed them in fome degree of their
genuine beauty, unobfcurcd by vulgarifnjs, incor-
reftnefs, and terms of partial acceptanon.*
There is extant a .letter written, in 1746-7,
to a perfon lately joined with the people called
Quakers, which is attributed to Wefley, in which
the author examines the opinions of that body, as
fet forth by Barclay. He fubdivides fome of the
propofitions, fo as to extraft from the fifteen, twentyr
fix articles, to thirteen of which he agrees. On
the fubjeft of Juftification, a topic on which J.
Wefley feems to have thought himfelf particularly
enlightened^ Barclay is quoted as fbllows : ' As
' many as receive the light, in them is produced a
' holy and fpiritual birth, bringing forth holinefs,
' righteoufnefs, purity, and all other bleffed fruits.
' By which holy birth, as we are fanftified, fo are
' we juftified.' The letter writer goes on. . ' Here
' is a wide difference between Quakerifm and
* Chriftianity. This is flat juftification by works.
' Whereas the Chriftian doftrine is, that^we are
• juftified by faith : that unto him that worketh not,
' but believeth on him that juftifieth the ungodly,
' his faith is counted to hira for righteoufnefs,
' The ground of this miftake is the not underftanding
* the raeaning ofthe word Juftification, For Robert
* What I have faid here may be thought incpnfifient with that well
known tenet of our Society, which denies human learning to be necelTary
for Gofpel Miniftry. J however acknowledge th^ tenet in its fullett
extent ; believiqg that the fame Power which can ihake the dumb to
{ptak, can alfo make the ignorant and unlearned to be as the pen of a
feady writSr. But feeing written langjuage wants the accent, cmphafia^
tone, and geilure, by which the meaning of vocal language is much con
veyed, a proper ctioice and arrangement of words is inore elTeotial (o th#
ffrmcr tl^i^n to the latter.
f)4

56
' Barclay' takes it in tlie fame fenfe as the Papifts do,
* confounding it with Sanftification-. So in the
* 2o8th page of his Apology, he fays iu exprefs
' terms, Juftification, taken in its proper fignification-,
' is Making juft, and is all one with Sanftificadou.:'
It might here be aflced whether the' receiving of
the light be not faith. If it be, this is not 'Flat
'juftification by works.' But by reciting the whole
of this Thefis of Barclay, which is a fhort. one, we
fhall further fee that fuch a charge was premature^
and we may alfo be tempted to believe that the
letter writer, fliort as it is, had not read It through.
Prop. VII. ' As many .as refift not this light,
* but receive the fame, it becomes in them an
' holy, pure, and -fpiritual birth, bringing forth
' holinefs, righteoufnefs, purity, and -all thofe
' other bleffed- fruits which are acceptable to
' God : by which holy birth, to wit, Jefus Chrift
' formed within us, and working his works in
-' us, as we are fanftified, fo are We juftified in the
' fight of God, according to the apoftle's words,
" But ye are -waihed, but ye are fanftifi.ed, but
" ye are juftified,' in. the name ofthe Lord Jefus,
" aiid'by the Spirit of our God." i Cor. vi. , 1 1.
« Tiierefore it is not by our wdrks, wrought in
^ our will, nor yet by good works, eonfidered as
' of themfelves ;^but by Chrift, who. is both " the
' ;gift and the giver, and the caufe producing the
'effeft "in us; who as he hath reconciled us
'while we were enemies, doth alfo in his wifdom
'faye us and juftify us after this manner: "as
' faith the fame apoftle elfewhere; " According
" to his mercy he faved us, by, the wafliing
" of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy
" Gholl." . Can ihis be called Flat , juftification
by works.!* .:iv-:

57
It ;is not the objeft of thefe refearches tb^
examine doftrines ; but to fliow that all' who have
undertaken to examine ours, have not. let us fairly
{peak- our own language ; and that from a mutilated
quotation a falfe conclufion is drawn ; otherwife it
may be fufpefted that not only the opinion of this
letter writer, concerning Barclay's view of juftifica
tion is erroneous ; but that his own view of the
fubjeft, and that more openly carrying the ffamp
of Wefley,* is liable to difpute. But T forbear.
My defire is that no one who defires tobe acquainted
,with our doftrines, may take thera pn truft from
any befide ourfelves : then let them receive a cur
rency according to their iiUrinfic value;
Since I wrote what precedes, I have perufed a
fraaU pamphlet publifhed in 17.78, intitled, ' Rea-
¦*.fons for quitdng the Methodift Society, beiiig a
'defence of Barclay's Apology, in anfwer' to a
. ¦* Wefley's firft view of. the fubjevSl: of Juftification, which h.e_appears
to have gamed from his interco'urfe with the Moravians, Hems to Jiave
been tliat it coniifted in a fudden inward^fenfe of pajdoij foi; pjij .fins, to
gether with a lively faith, which .tended to good works, Jlnd ptefaved
•ftHm eviJ. The many wonderful inftasees ofjpotfoBsfuddenly faiUr^
io-^p. and hewaijing tiieir fins,, und^r the miniftiy oiT^hf e.irly Methodiflj,
anfl afterwards as 'fuddenly declaring they had' foDftra"'recoiiciliation,-are
adduced as examples-of juftification by faith. Barclay's more fimple ex-
j)lanation of the word,, Jifftj^catien, Being made jujl; he fe?ms to, r^jeiSl.
It is-'-proba'ble, however, from an abftra^i: of the mihirtes of conference,
jWhifii I find,ia.^li)iteh?3<l'6 Life'of '^isfiey, Vtjli, II- p. 315 to J44, that
the opinions j)f •the latter had be.pn fomewhat changed *bn this point. T.o
the queftion,' We feid in i"744, we have le?.ne'd'too much toward Cal-
• vinifm. Wherein ?' — One anl'wer, a}^oiBg;maiiy',jrs', ' We Jraife received
• it as a maxim that a man is to do nothing, in order to Juftification. N,o-
• thing can be more falfe. Whoever'dfefires to find favour with God,
* ihould ceafe to do evil, and learn to dp wq^. ?S{j Gp/ihjpifelf .teaches by
' the prophet I.'-aiah. Whoever repents ihould do works meet for repent-
' ance. And if this is not in order to find favour,' wh.it does he do t-hem
Afor?'",;^g«n, 'Oots not talking, wit}iout>lihe<j>r<^erQ^ution of ajuilified
*i)r fan^ified ftate, tend to miflead men;, -^almo/l" naturaUy leading theip
«to truft to"w%at lyas done in one' hionient?f' Whereas -ive ar&everyrina-
,'.menf pleafing or difpleafing to Godj aceqiji^ing to eur^woricsj! ^^ccp^ing
' to the whole bf our prefent inVard tempers, arid outwarcT tehavioun*
It iftc^didjin 9 reJigiouSijS^cietj^^ tluipoMOly to asrQTy i^.gt'rp.rsr; #nd
'doe's credit to tTiq.Methodift cpote'rence-c^,; 770. .'¦.,'',:,'.,"' ¦ -.%

58
P printed letter to a p>erfon joined with the people
* called Quakers,' by John Helton. It appears from
this that Wefley was the undoubted author of the
letter in queftion ; apd that it was eonfidered in
ii778,' among the Methodifts, as a notable prefer-
vative againft Quakerifm : t'o which J. Helton,
from being one of J. Wefley's approved preachers,
had lately become a convert. This traft is a well
adapted anfwer to the doftrinal part of Wefley's
•letter (for fuch I fliall now call it) and contains
another inftance pf his unfair method of quodng
R. Barclay, (p. 6 and. 7) refpefting the fubjeft,
Scriptures, In that, part pf his letter whei^e he
treats on Baptifm, he feems to ufe the fame liberty;
and as what he fays is fhort, I fliall tranfcribe the
whole ; and fhall add in an oppofite column the
real words of Barclay, that the reader may judge
how far his confequence. can be drawn from thera.
XII. " As there is one Lord and one faith, fo
" #liere is one baptifin," ' Yea, one outward bap-
^ iifm, which you deny. Here therefore is another
* difference between QuakeTifm ajid Chriftianity,'*
' But " if thofe whon?. «' If thofe that werf
" John baptized with " baptized with water,
*' water, were not bap- " were not," 8$c,
" tizcd with the baptifra
" of Chrift ; then the
" baptifm of water is not
" the baprifm of Chrift."
» This is a mere quibble. The fequel ought to
-be. Then that baptifm of water (i. e^ John's
baptifm) was not the baptifra of Chrift, Whd
• The words df Wefley are dinftigulflied by fingle commas ; thofe of
llarcla^, whetl^er rightljr quoted or not', by double one».

59
* fays it was? Yet Robert Barclay Is fo fond of this
'argument, that he repeats it In almoft the fanl«
'words. " If yohn who admi- " If he who really
*' niftered the baptifm " and truly adminiftered
^' of water, yet did not *' the baptifm of water,
" bapdze with the bap- " did, notwithftanding,
** dfm of Chrift ; then " declare that he neither
^' the baptifm of water " could nor did baptize
'• is not the bapdfm of '* with the baptifiii of
*' Chrift." " .Chrift ; then," &c
* This is the fame fallacy ftill. The fequel here
* alfo fliould be " Then that' baptifm of water wag
* not the baptifra of Chrift."
^ He repeats if, with a little variation, thq third
^ time;' " Chrift himfelf faith, " Chrift himfelf faith
*' John baptized with " John truly baptized
" water, but yfc fliall be " with water, but," ^c,
" baptized with the Ho- '
'My Ghoft."
It may here be remarked, that Barclay builds aa
arguraent on the word, truly, omitted by Wefley,
'<-John truly bapuzed with water, which is as
" much as if he had faid, John did truly and fully
" adminifter the baptifra of water, but ye fhall be
" baptized with, &c. This fheweth that they
" were to be baptized with fome other baptifm,
" than the baptifin of water; and that although
" they were formerly bapuzed with the baptifm of
" water, yet not with that qf Chrift, which they
^' were to be bapdzed with." Apol, p, 417.
|ldit. 6th, 7th, or Sth. ' : '
IVefley goes oq ^ He repeats it a fourth rime.

*

60

" Peter faith, Then
"'remembered 1 the
« word of the Lord,
¦" John baptized With
'^ water, but ye fliall be
'f haptized-with the Ho-
"- ly Ghoft. From all
" which it follows, that
" fuch as John baptized
*' with water, yet were
" not baptized with the
" baptifm of Chrift."

" Then remembered
" I the word of the
" Lord, John indeed
" baptized with water,
" but ye fhall be bap-
" tized with the Holy
" Ghoft"—" From all
" which three fentences,
" relative one to another,
'¦'¦ firjl of John, fecondly
" of Chrift, and ikifdly
" of Peter, it doth evi-
" c't'?//)/ follow that fuch
" as it'6/-6 truly and really
" baptized wiih the bapf-
; " tifm of water, were not-
" withftanding not bap-
" tized with the baptifm
" of the Spirit, which is
" that of Chrift." Ibid.
' Very true' adds Weliey to his mutilated cita
tion, ' But this proves neither more nor lefs than
'.that the baptifm of Jbhn diftered from the bap-
.'¦tifm of Chrift. And fo. doubtlefs it did: not
' indeed as to the outward fign, but as -to the in-
' wardgrace.' Affumption, without proof !
Here,, -although Wefley. had faid tbeforie. There
is but one outward bapftfra,, he. allows of two ; and
here he lets go the fubjeft, in a manner which- 1
think can afford litdc fatisfaftion to fuch as choofe
to examine this part of Barclay for themfelves.
For Barclay, winding up diis proof, taken fi-om the
before-mcndoned words of John, Chrift, =• and
Peter, and fhowing, as I have juft q.ppted,. that
fudi.as were truly baptized with water, were not
withftanding not baptized with- the baptifra of

61 -
Chrift, thus continues, " And fuch as -truly aWid
" really did adminifter the baptifm of water, did,
" in fo doing, not- adminifter the baptifm of Chrift.
"'So that if there be now but one baptifra, as 'we
" have already proved,iiWe may fafely conclude it
" is that of the Spirit, and not;of water ; -elfe St
" would follow that the one baptifhi, which nbw
" continues, were the baptifm. of water, i. ie.
" John's Baptifra, and not- the baptifm of the
" Spirit, i. e. Chrift 's:; wlwch were moft abfurd,"
But, I repeat it, doftrine is not,' my immediate ob
jeft. For the. fubjeft of baptifm in .general I refer
-to Barclay; and for the .-doftrine of Wefley'^
letter, to his, I think, candid examiner, Helton.
I have no defire by thefe remarks to detraft
from any part of the juft reputation of J«hri Wefley,
whom I believe to ihave been the inftrument of good
to thoufands,; and whofe memory, as it is preferved
in the various 'accounts of his life, I refpeft and lo.ve»
It was. natural for • him to. rej.oice in the increafe
of the numerous fociety which fprung up under his
miniftry ; but while he was thus fo far fatisfied,
at feeing the defire of his foul, it was alfo natural
for him to lament when his adherents forfook him ;
and feveral did forfake the Methodift fociety, to
join with that of our Friends. That he fhould
thei;efore regard with no favourable eye a body
which was fometimes receiving recruits, by fecef-
fions; from his own, is by no means furprifing ;
and having thus acquired rather a diflike to
the Quakers, as infringers on his province, than
a love^ as fellow helpers in the promotion of holi
nefs, he was not prepared, when, in preparing his
Concife Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, he came to Mo-
fheira's raifreprefentations of that people ; he was
not, I fay, prepared, to wifh them to be untrue ;

^2
^nd confeqlieritTy not to take pains Ifr inquiring
whether they were fo. It ftiould alfo be remem
bered that at the dm6 he publiflled his Concife
JHiftory, he was about feventy-eight yeafs of age ',
a time in which minute and fevere inveftigation of
literary fubjefts is hardly to be expefted ; and. If
a ftranger to him may judge, he was probably at
that time engaged in the frequent and aflUduou^
exercife of his mitiiftry, as well as "in much travel
ling from place to place : for even after this I find
him in Holland, when he was about eighty, and
again when he was about eighty-three. Thefe
avocations were fcarcely compatible with the de^
fcriber of the events of the chureh , ffom the
birth of Chrift to the prefent time: but Wefley's
good-will to the caufe, his yet entefprifing mind,
and, it is poffible, the general deference of his
friends to his judgment, prevented him from dif-
cerning it, and from fufpefting himfelf no longer
equal to the talk which he had undertaken.

rtis,

LIFE OF
JAMES NAYLER,
WHEREIN IT IS ATTEMPTED T« IMCLOOB
MORE PARTICULARS RESPECTING HIM,
Than art to be found la any one Account Elttattf.
INTERSPERSED WITH
REFLECTIONS
ARJSINC FROM THE SUBJECT.

65

THE LIFE of JAMES NAYLER, &c.

I HAVE thought it might be ufeful, even at
this length of time from the fufferings of James
Nayler, to give fome more complete view of his
life than yet has been done. He is/ftiU cited, as an
irrefutable proof of the fuppofed danger of adopt
ing principles in religion, fuch as thofe which the
Quakers profefs to hold. This was probably what
the parliaraent of 1656 would have defired, if not
what they intended by their cruel fentence; and
as in this refpeft they imitated tfieir high-church
predeceffors, in the ufe of the fcourge, the mu
tilating knife, and the dungeon ; fo at prefent, men
who profefs to abhor the principles of the long
parliament, ftill join with it, in that difpofition
which led to fuch rigorous conduft; namely, a
defire to viflify the body of which Nayler was a con-
fpicuous member. It is certainly difficult to ap
preciate the motives of raen ; and in this inftance,
time, which often affifts in their developement, has
not brought any fafts to light which were not
known at the period pf which 1 ara about to treat.
But when, as I have elfewhere remarked, we per
ceive the parliament of 1656, fcarcely fparing the
life of Nayler (for a motion was made that his
pujo^ifhment fliould be death), and inflifting on him
pains that would not have been' uncongenial to th«
£

66
times of a Nero or a DiocleCan ; at the fame time
that the other aftors in the bufinefs for which he
was puniflied, were even not arraigned ; it is na
tural to conclude that the , purpofe of the feverity
then, like that of the obloquy caft on the memory
of Nayler now, was to render odious the principles
of the Quakers.
I therefore wifli, if the memory of James Nayler
may not reft peaceably, with the pepple who are
not afhamed to have had him among the number
of their early adherents, that the public may fee
the whole man, and not eftimate the tenor of his
life from a moment of difeafe. That he fell is not
denied, but that he rofe from, his fall is equally
u-ue ; and it fhows that either he poffeffed prin
ciples which, in the hours of his retreat, were
liifficient to difcover to him his errors, or that he
acquired them in his humiliation. We are not in
formed that he was other-wife after his reftoration^
than he had been previous to his downfal, that
is, an approved Quaker ; therefore to the due
and right application of the -doftrine which that
Society teaches, it is at leaft as fair to attribute his
recovery as his fall.
We have not much account of Nayler before he
became a Friend. His occupation of a foldier
would not give fuch fcope for the exercife of thofe
talents, which .his enemies allow hira to have pof
feffed, as that of a public fpeaker ; for he is faid
to have been an eloquent man. This probably was
not much more than a natural eloquence, affifted
with the very moderate learning which, in thofe
days, a hufbaudman raight be fuppofed to give to
his fon. The place of his birth was Ardfley, a
viUage in Yorkfhire. His father is faid to have
pofiidrcd au eftate fufficient, with induflxy, for the

' 61.,.
•}>urpofe of a comfortable fubfiftencei James was
born in 1618, and on his marriage, about 1640,
reraoved to Wakefield ; but the civil war breaking
out fhe following year, he became a foldjer jn the
army of Fairfax, and afterwards a quarter-mafter
under Lambert. Sicknefs, however) difabled hiraj
and detached him from his. miHtary emplpy; and
he retumed to Wakefield, after having been about
eight years in the army. During this time his ret
figious profeffion was among the IndependeutSi
George Fox was now fully entered pn his public
preaching; and came in the year 1651 to Wake
field,' where James Nayler dwelled. Nayler appears
readily to have fouiid in his own mind a confent to
the doftrine which Fox believed himfelf cafled to
promulgate ; and as Fox inforltis us In his Journal j
not that Nayler was convinced at a meetingj bu£
that he came to him and was convinced, it is
probable, that he had fought the company of
Fox; in order to difcover if the ;doftrine of the
latter could fatisfy the want, which every-' thought
ful and fincere man muft find, from indecifion on
a matter fo important, as that which concerns the
future svell-being of the foul. That raany ferious
perfons at this period, fliould be unfettled and un*
decided is no matter of ¦ furprize. England, was^
then torn with inteftine commotion On account of
religion; and the profeffed followers of the Prince
of Peace were either pretending to defend his caufe
by the fword, or were making that caufe a colour
for their own ambition. It was, and it loUg conti
nued to be, a dme of violence and extremes : and if
any of the primitive Quakers partook in any degree
of the temper of the times ; and were in a greater
or lefs proportion, fhaken from the' centre of im
mutable truth ; thofe furely who do npt, witb
E 2

68
"them, allow the nouon of a fpiritual inward di-
reftion of the conduft, fliould be the foremoft to
paUiate that to which man by nature is fo evidently
prone. Nayler appears to haye been from his youth*
a perfon attentive to religion, and the year en-
fuing that: of his convincement, he believed him
felf bound in religious duty to quit his family, and
travel, as the -way might, from time to time, be
opened in his mind. He declares himfelf ro have
received this commiffion, while he was meditating
on the things of God, in the field at plough ; that
be then heard a voice, bidding him go . out from
his kindred and from his father's houfe, with a
prcanlfe that the Lord would be with him. He
fays that he exceedingly rejoiced to hear the voice
of the Lord, whom he had profeffed from a child,
and had endeavoured to ferve ; and made fome
preparadon for his journey; that he afterwards how-^
ever was difobedient to this voice, on which ac;-
count he declares the wrath of God was upon him,
fo that he appeared in danger of lofing his life ;
till at length, going a little way from home with a
friend, not then thinking of a journey, and unpro
vided for one, he was comraanded to go into the
weft. What was the purpofe of his miffion he
knew not ; but on his arrival it was given hira
what to declare ; and thus he continued, not know
ing one day what he was to do on the morrow. It
does not appear clearly whether this journey was
to the weft of England, or only weftward of his
habhation, Wakefield. The latter is moft pro-
* The Committee of Parliament, however, accufe him of blafphe^ny,
and what it terms, ' Uncivil and wanton carriage with a married wo-
Man.' The latter article is fwelled into adultery, by one Deacon, v/ha
wrote two pamphlets againft Nayler, about the time of his fentence.
Thia Deacon and Nayler had -been opponents in writing.

69
bable, for in the year 16,52 we find him, fuffering
much perfonal abufe at Walney Ifland, iu Lanca-..
fhire, difputing with priefts in Weftmoreiand ; and,
fin-ally, in the Eleventh month of that year, in
difted at the quarter feffions at Appleby, for what
was termed blafphemy : that isj according, to the
indiftraent, for having faid that Chrift was iu him,,
and there was. but one word bf God. On this
occafion it appears that divers ofthe commonwealth
preachers either had been the prompters of the
arreft, or accufers; on the trial. It turned much .on;
the circumftance of Nayler's afferting Chrift to be in.
him.; but concluded without convift-ing him ofthe
blafphemy for which he had been indifted. Never
thelefs the juftices ordered him to be kept in prifon,
until certain petitions fhould be anfwered, whi-ch^
had been preferred againft him, G,eQrge Fox,
Fj-ancis Hp-yvgil, and others. By this mufl have
be;en meant anfwers by- the prifoners to the alle^
gations of the petitioners. James Nayler remained"
about twenty weeks in prifon, during which time.>
he publifhed, jointly with George Fox, a pamphlet, !
Intided, ' Several Petitions anfwered, that wcsre
' put. up by the Priefts of Weftmoreiand,' &c. Jt'
is fingular, if this piece procured his liberty, feeing^
it abounds with cenfure, npt. very gently exprefl^d,,
againft the petitioning priefts. There" is in, it,
among other, things, a paper figned Jervis ip^enfpif,.
-who bad been pne-of the magiftrates on the bench,
at Appleby, \Yhereby. it appears" that, akhpugh it
was afleged "(another account fays, by Behlbh
himfelf,) that the^-^ppcds fpoken by Nayler, .were
not within tht aft againft blafpheniy, nor againft'
any law; two other magiftrates^ had declared tljpih-
felves -ss'illing to rifque the being fined at theaffizS'l,'
rather' than that he fliould have his'lfbeftjtVail^^"
^3

70
that juftice Pearfon tp}d his colleague Benfon, the
fubfcri6er of the paper, that he muft give an ac^
count of their proceedings to the minifters and
others, So prieft-ridden, if this paper be genuine,
was a quarter-fefliions in 1652.
It will not be foreign to the bufinefs of illuf-
trating the long def^-med charafter of Nayler, to
obferve that Pearfon, although not appearing
friendly to him, received on this occafion fuch im-
preffions in favour of the principles held by Friends,
that he afterwards joined them, and became him
felf an open arid able ad-yocate for them in wridng : -
and this in a work not written from the impulfe
fas it is called) of the moment, and without ftudy,
or confultation of writers, but evincing a mind
which had weU weighed the fubjeft, and was well
verfed in it.*
The fame year that Nayler was releafed frora
Appleby gaol, if not during his confineraent in it,
x^e find him alfo writing a paper, entided, ' Truth
^ cleared from Scandal, being Jaraes Nayler's
* Anfwer and Declaration touching fome things
' charged upon him iu the Lancafhire Petition, j-
It feems by this, that ^he minifters in Lancafhire
had alfo been alairmed at his doftrine ; and when
We confider he, was one of the eariy declairaers
againft forced maintenance, It is not wonderful
that they fhould be. A doftrine, at all times
difagreeable to the lucrative teacher, had then alfo
the appearance of inuovatipn ; and wheii the fupi
* The great ftate of Tythes, truly ftatedj clearly opened, and fully
Tefolvcd, 5y Anthony Pearfon, formerly a juftice ofthe peace in -Weft
moreiand- . ' .....
t "Tnis was a petition to the council of ftate againft 5ox and Nayler.
|t j»»6 Jikewife anfwered by the'm jointly, in a book called Saul's Erraml.
¦to Damafcus, -witb. Hi Packit of ZOtiri from tbe Bieh Priep arainJI thi DifcipUi
of th Lord. ¦¦- ,.,.'. 1 .. " rl", * •< -^

71
port of preconceived and gainful opinions, and not
truth, is the objeft of folicitude. Innovation is an
alarming word. It might not, however, have been^
neceffary to mention this paper, on account of the
perfons to whom it was an anfwer; but as it con
tains James Nayler's belief concerning Chrift, it is
material to be noticed ; becaufe the outcry that
was, a few years after, raifed -againft him, was on
the pretence of great error on this point of faith.
' Concerning Jefus Chrift, (fays Nayler) who is
' the eternal Word of God, by whom all things
' were made and are upholden, who was before
* all time, but manifefted in tirae for the recovery
' of loft man, which word became flefh, and dwelt
* among the faints, who is the fame yeflerday, and
' to day, and for ever; who did and dpth dwell in
* the faints ; who fuffered and rofe again, and af.
' cended into heaven, and is fet on the right hand'
* of God ; to whbm all power is given, in heaven
' and in earth ; who filleth all places ; he is the
' fight of the world ; but known to none but thofe.
? who receive and foflow him ; and thofe he leads
' up to God, out of all the ways, works, and wor.f
' fhips of the world ; by his pure light in them,
* whereby he reveals the raan of fin, and by ^is
* power cafts hira out, and fo prepares the bodies
» of the faints a fit temple for the pure God to
' dwell in, with whom dwells no unclean thingi,
' And thus he reconciles God and man, m^ the
' image of God which in purity and holinefs is re-;
< newed ;' and the image of Satan, which is all fin
* and uncleapnefs, is defaced. And none can wIIt
^ nefs redemption, further than Chrift is thus re-
S vealed in them, to fet them free from fin : which
« Chrift I witnefs to be revealed In me in meafure.'
Gal, i, 16. - a Cor. xiii. 5. Col. \. 27, The oihef
£ 4

72
heads of the, paper are, concerning the Scriptures,
baptifm, the refurreftion, magiftracy, and the mi
niftry. After the termination of his confinement, Nayler
continued travelling iii the fervice of the gofpel in
the north of England, and at lengdi, in the year
1654, came to London. He declares hirafelf to
have entered into that city with the greateft fear
that had ever been his experience on entering into
any place : in fpirit forefeeing that fomething would
befal him in it ; but not knowing what it fliould
be.* It is with difficulty we trace his proceedings
In London, and afterwards in the country, with
accuracy. It is probable the Quakers were fo
ranch grieved with the occafion for reproach which
he gave, that none of them thought fit to note
occurrences which they probably wiflied to be for
gotten. But they have been, and will be, remem
bered. Let us therefore ender.vour to view them
through as few falfe mediums as we can ; and it
will be found that the ftory is not lefs fraught with
• Inftruftion, thai} the thing itfelf was with reproach ;
for, where is the man, be his natural qualifications,
his acquirements, or his gifts, what they mayf who
can fay he has no need of the caution ? " Let hira
*' that thinketh that he ftandeth, take heed left he
"fall." It appears that Edward Burrough, and Francis
Hpwgil ("Nayler's fellow-prifoners at Appleby),
had beeq the means of gathering a congregation
of Friends in London, previoufl.y tp the ^arrival of
James Nayler. Much admiration, however, was
excited in many of the hearers by the preaching
* This ie in a fmall piece intitled, ' To the Life of God in Ml ;' qn?
jf t?i? paper? in which he defcribfa the picans of Jiis fi(ll,

73 .
of the latter ; fo much indeed as to induce fome
inconfiderate women to undervalue Burrough and
liowgil, and to difturb them in their miniftry. This
diforderly behaviour was reproved by the two mi-
nillers ; but the women not being filenced, as it was
hardly to be expefted they would be, by the repre-
henfion of perfons whom they had taken upon them
to judge, preferred, againft Burrough and Howgil,
their complaints to Nayler ; and endeavoured to
incenfc him againft them. James did not appear
forward to condemn his friends ; but this effeft of
his well-founded fears increafed the earneftneff of,
his wild admirers ; one of whom falling into a kind
of paffionate grief, exclaimed, in a flirill but mourn
ful voice, ' I looked for judgment ; but, behold a
' cry.' The piercing lamentations of this woman
are eonfidered as having, had a great fliare in over
turning the judgment of Nayler ; and he became
not only the dupe of her violent grief, and of that
of her affociates, but was alfo further led- afide by
their flattery: while, from his former inumates,^the
leading members of the Society of Friends, he was
more and more eftranged. For about this time
were thofe letters written to him, in which he is
faid to have been addreffed by the dtle of Ever-
lafting Son of Righteoufnefs, or that of Prince of
Peace, only begotten Son of God, Faireft of ten
thoufand. That feveral perfons, fhould be found to
concur in fuch' impious adulation, is at firft fight a
rnatter of furprize ; neverthelefs, the page of ec
clefiaftical hiftory has but too many inftances of. the
extravagant effeft of unbridled fancy, interfering
In the province of religion : but, though thefe fur- .
nifh matter of ridicule to the fcoffer, and of ex
ultation to the infidel, they in no wife Ihake tbe

74 •
confidence of the humble believer ; but enforce
with emphafis, the injunftion, '.' Watch."
Nayler allows this time to have been a time
of darknefs ; a darknefs of which probably
they can beft, if not only, judge, who have wit-
neffed a ftate of light. The worldly mind, which
flights the idea of divine illumination, and which is
Contented with the twilight of mere human judg
ment, arifing as it often does, frora mifcpnception,
as it cannot comprehend ths clearnefs of the light
which the fingle eye receives, fo neither can it
fathbm the darknefs confequent on the clofe of that
eye of faith, which hath been once opened in thq
foul. " If the light that is in you become dark-
" nefs, how great is that darknefs 1" It therefore
frequently condemns where it ought to pity, or at
leaft it omits to add pity to its condemnation. Thus
afted, I believe, thofe who contrived the punifh
ment of James Nayler. It is remarkable that Nayler
declared it to be his fear of oppbfing what might
be right in his partifiins, that prevented his oppofing
and reproving their extravagancies. Having loft
his fpirit of difcernment, he was in a fituation to
accept almoft any thing as truth, more efpecially
that which was gratifying : and however his will
had been concerned in the early part of hia de
viation, I am inclined to think that, in its progrefs,
he did not intend evil ; but thought himfelf for,
bearing, in humility, to judge the aftions of othersj
and receiving their honour not as done (p his per
fon, but to that extraordinary manifeftation of
Chrift which he continued to think he poffeffed.
This opinion the fequel may eftablifti or overthrow,'
Let us proceed with the narrative.
We are not clearly Informed at what time of
Nayler's refidence in London the difturbauces

75
which he occafioned begun. I apprehend not
until 1656; for it is not likely a courfe fo extra
vagant fhould have been long without a check.
In 1655 ^*"^ ^656, he appears to have publiflied
about fixteen pamphlets, feveral of them contro-
verfial ; and fome of them which were not fo,
being republifhed in the colleftion of his works^
1716, it feems to fliow that he had not, at the
time of their being written, feparated from the
fellowfhip of the Friends. Nor Indeed does it ap-«
pear that he was ever forward to do fo ; for the
next memorial we have of him, as it confirms my
opinion of the date of his errors, proves his defirqi
to retain his acquaintance with his friends. In
the fummer of 1656, George Fox was in prifon at
Launcefton, and James Nayler, on his way to pay
hira a vifit, was hirafelf iraprifoned at Exeter. With
the exaft caufe of his being confined, and with the
mode of his releafe, we are unacquainted ; f but a5
it appears that his frantic companions were with
hira, it may be fuppofed it was owing to foraq
difturbance whicji was raifed. As other friends,
however, on their way to fee George Fox, were
iraprifoned at Exeter, this fuppofltion is not con,.
clufive ; although G. Fox hints at a difturbance
which Nayler had previoufly occafioned at Briftol,
George Fox was releafed from Launcefton on the
13th ofthe Seventh month (September) and after
a fhort ftay in Cornwall, was himfelf the vifitor
* An anonymous account, publifhed 17^9, intitled, • Memoirs ofthe
' Life, Miniftry, Trials, and Sufferings,- of James Nayler, the Quakers*
'great Apoftle,' cites the comttiittee «f parliament, as mentioning in
theii: Report, that he was committed as a vagrant, and releafed by
order of council. The author denies the former, and f^ys in a note,
that Saunders gave hira liberty to go on his journey; but. that he was
brought back about twenty^ miles, a'nd committed by a judge, and fined
fweiity marks for not putting off his hat  rN. B. The autlior of the
Memoirs appears t9 be * violent S<Jnw«r of Nailer, though probaWynot
^ (;^afeer, ' ¦ ¦

76
at Exeter prifon of thofe whofe intention it had
been to vifit hira, in his fevere durance at Launcefton.
William Penn fays of George Fox, that ' he was
' a difcerner of other jnens' fpirits, and much a
' mafter of his own.' Fox, in his journal, declares
his fenfe that Nayler and his company were
wrong, and dates his deviation, which Fox calls
his running out into imaginations, to a little time
before his own releafe from prifon. George Fox
had^a meeting with the prifoners, but Nayler
did not remain with them while the meeting was
held ; and the following day George fpeaking to
him (probably by way of advice) James, though
he flighted his advice, offered to George a falu-
tation, which the latter in his turn rejefted : faying
that fince Nayler had turned againft the power of
God, he could not receive his fliow of kindnefs.
George adds in the fame paragraph of his journal,
' After fome time he returned to truth again.' The
fight of his return was, probably, -then at a diftance,
for in this prifon he fuffered three of his female ad
herents to kneel before him and kifs his feet.
Being releafed from Exeter, he made his way
towards Briftol, his flattering companions attending
him. It is faid, by -an adverfary, that garments
were ftrewed in his way at Glaftonbury and Wells ;
but it is allowed on all hands, that his entry into
Briftol was in imitation of the manner of the entry
of Chrift into Jerufalem. A man went bare-headed
before him, a woman led his horfe, three others
ftrewed their fcarfs and handkerchiefs in the way,
and the company fung, ' Holy, holy, holy, is the
Lord God of hofts; Hofannah in the higheft; holy,
holy, holy, is the Lord God of Ifrael.* So e^jtra-
ordraary a proceffion and acclaraadon, could not
fail of attrafting the notice of the police of any

77
well regulated city ; but it afforded to the perfe
cutors of (he Quakers, an opportunity of colouring
their general feverity, Which it was not likely they
would mifs. However, to the apprehending of
James Nayler, and to the examining of him and
of his companions, no valid objeftion can be made.
It was required for the peace of fociety. That the
fubfequent ftepswere neceffary, is much to be
doubted. ,
One is led to think that the laws of England had
at that time no provifion for the punifliing of fuch
difturbances ; fince the legiflature took upon itfelf
fipft to be the court of trial, and next the awarder
of the nature and quantity of the penalty. If we
allow that laws did exift, by which the offenders
could have been punifhed, we muft look for fonle
other motive, which could induce the parliament
to take the bufinefs into its own hands ; to deliberate
on it frpm day_; to day, to the interruption of
public concerns ; to conclude it at length with fo
much feverity, and even to have meditated more.
If we fuppofe it was the honour of the Chriftian
religion which it- had at heart, and the abhorrence
of blafphemy which it felt, why then did, it not
purfue the companions of Nayler with eqiiahfeve-
rity ; from whofe mouths proceeded the expreffions
which were terraed blafphemous ; arid whofe hearts,
hands, and knees, had been the means of erefting
hiin into an objeft of worfliip? For my part, Ihave
long fufpefted the feleftipn of- the viftim to have
arifen from a defire to ¦. crufh the .rifmg fociety of
Friends, in the perfon of a-fallen brother. Nayler
had been truly eminent. and,.efteeraed. The others
oWed, their notoriety, only to the injurious part
which they were afting towards, him.. ^
The houfe intgrfered.the 30th of November, and

78
received the repoi't of a committee the 5th of Decerti-
ber; and, after twelve times taking up the bufinefs
(at fome of which however it was only to adjourn it),
on the 1 6th they conftrufted their -fentence, which
was refolved in form the day following. Before
however we recite it j a furaraary view of the pro
ceedings will be proper.
The evidence appears tohaVe been taken before
the committee of parliament, , and agreed to by the
houfe. The fafts, as to the kneelings, fmging^
ftrewing'garments; and walking in proceffion, were
proved, as well by other Witrieffes, as by the ready
confeffion of the ^aftors themfelves; who rather
gloried in their deeds., than attempted to deny them.
Nayler alfo confeffed the fafts alleged, and expreffed '
his belief that his companions were moved of the
Lord to perform the part they had taken. One of
the charges was, his having ' ajfumed the name and
' the incommunicable attributes and tides of our
' bleffed Saviour,' as " The Faireft often thoufand ;
the Only begotten Son of God." The evidence for
thefe were letters written to him by others. At one
of his examinations, being afked whether he had
reproved the perfons who gave him fuch titles, he
would not fay that he had reproved them ; and to
the queftion, whether he owned or difclaimed them,
he replied, ' If they had it from the Lord, what
* ara I that I fhould judge It ? ' He alfo faid, ' If
* attributed to the creature, then it is reproyable.
• If they did it to the Lord (whora he believed to,
be in himj then I dare not reprove it : ' alfo that
he looked upon it to be really to the true honour
of Chrift, or elfe he would utterly have denifetf it.
During -this tirae It is faid to have been the praftice
of Nayler's companions, at his lodging, when under
cuftody of the ferjeant of the houfe, to fit on the

79
floor, or on their heels, or to k»eel, finging their
ufual ejaculations of praife, while he was feated in
a chair ; but my anonymous annotator fays, they
did the farae in his abfence. It appears however
that he was ftill clouded in raind, and far frora that
ftate of true and lively contrition, to which he after
wards attained. The following anfwer, which
feeraed to clofe his exaraination before the cora-
mlttee, will however fhow that he was not without
forae perception of the true and only objeft of re
ligious honour. ' 1 do abhor that any of that
' honour which is due to God, fliould be given to
* me, as I am a creature ; but it pleafed the Lord
' to fet me up as a fign of the coming of the rigli-
' teous one ; and what hath been done in ray
' paffing through the towns, I was commanded by
' the Lord to fuffer fuch tilings to be done to the
'outward as a fign. L abhor any , honour as a.
' creature.* The report of the committee, having been re
ceived by the whole houfe on the 5th of December,,
the next day Nayler was li-ad before the houfe, and
ordered to kneel, which he refufed ; and feveral
queftions were aflied of him, of which no record
feems to have been kept'. By the Sth, the parlia
ment got fo far as to refolve, ' That James Naj^ler,
' upon the whole m-atterof faft, is! guilty of horrid
' blafphemy ; ' alfo, ' That James Nayler is a grand
' impofter and feducer of the, people.' The houfe
having paffed thefe two refolves, the queftion carae
daily before it (the i4tli excepted, which was the
Firfl day of the week),, unul the 1 6th, and-two divl»
•> fions took place, when a motion was made that the
punifhment fliould be death. This was loft by the
majority of ninety-fix to eighty-two, and, after
piuch defiberauon the fame, day, the next day the

so
punlflimcnt was refolved as follows, * Refolved*
' That, James Nayler be fet on the pillory, with
' his head in the pillory, in the Palace Yard, Weft-
' minfter,during the fpace of two hours, onThurfday
• next (i. e. the following day), and fhall be whipped
' through the ftreets from Weftminfter to the Old
* Exchange (i. e. the top of Cheapfide), London,
' and there likewife be fet on the pillory, with
'his head in the pillory, for the fpace of two
' hours, on Saturday next ; in each place wearing
* a paper, containing an infcription of his crimes;
' and that at the Old Exchange, his tongue be
' bored through with a hot iron, and that he be
' there alfo ftigmatized in the forehead with the
' letter B, and that he be afterwards fent to Briftol,
' and be conveyed into and through the faid city on
' horfe-back, bare ridged, with his face backward,
' and there alfo pubhcly whipped, the next market
' day after he coines thither, and that from thcEce
' he be committed to prifon in Bridewell, London,
' and there reftrained from.the fociety of all pieople,"^
' and there to labour hard till he fliall be releafed
' by parliament, and during that time fliall be de-
' barred the ufe of pen, ink, and paper, and fliall
' have no relief but what he earns by his daily
' labours.' Before the admiffion of Nayler to hear his fen
tence, it was moved that he fliould be aflced whether
he had any thing to fay, why judgment fhould not
be pronounced upon him ; which was determined
in the negative, by one hundred and feven to eighty-
feven. On the fpeaker preparing to pronounce
fentence, Nayler faid he did not know his offence;
to which the fpeaker (Widdrington) replied, ' that
* he fhould know his offence, by his punifliment.'
Although he was thus not permitted to fpeak, he
is faid, as he left the houfe, to have uttered thefe

81
Words, ' lie that "hath prepared the body, will
* eriable me to fuffer ; and I pray that he raay not
* lay it to your charge.' , >
It is natural to inquire what, during all thefe
proceedings. Was the part of OHver Cromwell, who
\tras then at the head of the executive govern
ment, under the title of Proteftpr. He appears
thus far not to have interfered at all ; and even the
warrants to the feveral fheriffs, for the execution \
of the fentence, were iffued by the fpeaker,,
On the day appointed, Nayler fuffered the firft
part of his fentence. He ftood the allotted time
in the pillory, and received, at a part, in i a courfe
of nearly two miles, three hundred and ten ftripes }
after which he was left with his wounds undreffed,
for above an hour ; when a, -woman, a perfon in
efteera with the fociety pf Friends, npt one of liis
ranting companions, came and; waflied his ftripes.
It is therefbre probable, that four hours rauft have
elapfed frora the tirae his head was faftened do-wn.
Until the arrival of this relief. A treatraent fo
fevere would bf courfe reduce his ftrerigth; and his
fufferings operated fo tovd^lj on the rainds of
feveral perfons, not raerabers of tl^q fociety of
Frlendsj that they petitioned parhament, for a
longer refpite than until the next day but one j
when, according to the fentence, he -was to bc: pil*
loried again, and buirni^d;n the forehead and tongue.
The parliament adcordingly granted a week's refpite,
naraely, .un|il the ;27th. Encquraged probably
by tliisj, ,, feveral other perfons pethioned fqr tha
remiffion of the remainder pf the fentence ; which
petitionj as it is ,a fpedmen pf the manner of the
times^ siTid cpntainjS alfo much,gQ<pd f^n.fe, ,pn4
tokens of., avcrfionfr,om, the ,pr,a^ip.q;,6(f jprtUring
the bdd'yj under pretence of raending the 'mind,
I here infert.

82
* To the pariiamcnt ofthe Comnionwealth of Eng-
'¦ '¦ land, Scotland, and li^eland, &c.^
' The humble petidon of divers peaceable and
' well-affefted perfons in the cities of London and
' Weftminfter, in behalf of themfelves and raany
' others, flieweth,
' That your moderation and clemency in refpiting
• the punifhment of James Nayler, in confideration
' of his illnefs of body, hath refrefhed the hearts
' of many thoufands in thefe cities, altogether un-
' concerned in his praftice ; and hath opened their
' ey^i to k& fomething niore ihanihe termors of M-oiCfit
^ -Sinai, to 'dwell upon- your honour (fble houfe; and
' hath likewife given thera fome hopes to fee you
' come forth in the Spirit of our LordJefUs, yet
' more and more, to the convincement of thofe
' that err, and' are out of the -Way. Wherefore
' we moft hurably beg ybur pardon, that are con-
• ftrained to appear befpre. you in fuch a fuit (not
* daring to do otherwife), that you would rerait the
* remaining 'part of your fentence againft James
* Nayler; leaving hira to the Lord, and to fuch
' gofpel remedies as He hath fanftified. And We
* are perfuaded yPu will firid fiich a courfe pf love
' aiid forbearance more ,effeftual to reclaim, and
* will leave a feal of your love, arid tendernefs upon
''our' fpirits.' ' And we fliall pray, &c.'
It is remarkable of this peduon,'whicb, as has been
faid, is a fpecimen of the manners of the rimes,
that it, too, contains words which raight, if a raale-
Vplent perfon were to interpret, be conftrued into
blafphemy. It will eafily be feen that I refer' to
the figure which would feem tp ereft the parliament

83
into a fecotld Sinai. Such however was much the
language of that day, a language which the loofe
manners of the Reftoration laughed out of fafliion ;
and which the more temperate raanners of our owu
times, times when we are too carelefs about reli
gion to be extravagant in it, forbid to become
again the mode. All I here mean to infer is, that
the Quakers fliould have their due fliare of aflow-
ancefor the habits, of the age In which they arofe ;
and not that all we find in them, which varies from
our prefent cuftoms, fhould be charged to their
peculiar principles.
With regard to the petition juft nientioned, it
was read and debated on ; but the petitioners do
not feera to have confided in it ; for they endea
voured to fupport it by another, which they
preferred to Crorawell. The proteftor thereon
wrote to the houfe, and, by forae words pf his
letter, feeraed alarraed for his prerogative. He
fays, after having difclairaed the countenancing of
fuch crimes-as 'are' fays he, ' comriionly, imputed'
to Nayler, ' not knowing how far fuch a proceeding.
' (wholly without, us) may extend in the confequence
'ofit, we defire the houfe will let us know the
' grounds and reafons, whereupon tfiey have pro
ceeded.' The letter feems to have only occafioned
a fruitlefe dehate, and^ the tirae of Nayler's ifecond
fuffering drawing near, the petitioners, on the 26th,
applied again to Cromwell.' All however feeraed
in vain, for, on ,the 27th, Nayler was conveyed
frora Newgate to the Old Excl|iange ; -ftood two
hours raore with his head in the pillory, and was
bored through the tongue and ftigraati?:ed. A few .
particulars refpefting the execution of this part of
the fentence, are, raaterial to relate The boring
iron and the mark, were red hot. The former
"¦ F.2 ~

(

84
Was held a fmall time in the tongue, that the by-
ftanders might be witneffes of the execution, and
the letter held to the forehead until finoke arofe ;
during which tirae Nayler did not flinch; but,
when he was unbound, he embraced the executioner.
The fortitude and patience of the fufferer, raay
probably be fho-wn by this recital; and, I think,
a confirmation of the opinion that the parliament
wanted to caft an odium on the Quakers, in the
perfon of Nayler, is to be found in the cfrcumftancfe
about to be related. On the i8th December,
the houfe had referred to a committee, the fafts
"and crimes ofthe reft of the perfons apprehended
with hira ; and yet on the 27th, three at leaft of
the woraen were fo much at libertyj as to come up
on the pillory, and feat themfelves, two before, and
one behind him., After execution, he was recon-
veyed to Newgate.
There is one occurrence which Ihould not be
omitted in taking a view of the cafe of Nayler ;
ahhough I am not able to penetrate Into the
motives which occafioned it; the delegailoii of
five minifters by the parliaraent, to confer with him :
namely, Caryl, Manton, Nye, Griffiths, and Rey
nolds. Th^y vifited hira on the 24th, which, being
previous to the date of CroraweU's letter, forbids
our fuppofing that the houfe had been raoved by
the Proteftor's interceffion, and was feeking for
grounds whereon to found its lenity. In this cafe"
too, . hs raeffengers, independent rainifters, men
whom Nayler and the Qnakers in general were
continually oppofing, were not likely perfons to
effeft his repentance^ Could it be that the houfe
was feeking further raeansof juftifying a feverity
in which it determined to perfift .? The conduft,
at leaft, of the vifitors, is dubious j for they refufed

85
that any witnefs fliould be prefent at their confe
rence.- Nayler, alarmed at this, refufed to fay any
thing, unlefs they confented that what'occurred
fhould be written ; and a copy figned by themfelves
left with him, of with the keeper of Newgate,
where he then was. This was at firft agreed, to ';
but on Nayler's uttering thefe words, ' How foon
' have you forgot the work of the bifliops, who
' are now found in the farae, feeking to infnare
' the innocent,' they rofe up, burned the papers,
and departed. It appears however, from what
James related of the conference, that he had per-
fifted in renouncing the adoration of the creature,
and in juftifying his having omitted to reprove
thofe who had bowed to what he efteemed the
power of Chrift in hirafelf. In fupport of this,
he had inquired of. his examiners, whether Efiflia
had been guilty of blafphemy, in not reproving
the Shunamite, when flie fell at his feet.
About three weeks after his fuffering the fecond
part of the fentence at London, the third part,
(namely, the ignominious expofure, and the fecond
.whipping), was inflifted at Briftol. It feems
doubtful, frora the account which I have followed
in this part of Nayler's life, that the whippi.ng
was much raore than formal, as a perfon is faid t6
have been fuffered to hold back the executioner's
arm ; but here a remarkable thing is related of.
one of Nayler's friends, whofe name is fo connefted
with the fufferings of the former, as not tp be
omitted in the relation of them. This was Robert
Rich, a merchant of London.. He had wrictai ta
the fpeaker, previous to the fentence of the houfe ;
offering to prove, from Scripture, that nothing
wrhich Nayler had faid or done, was blafphemy.
On the day of Nayler's whipping in London, he hax^
«3

86
ftood at the door ofthe houfe, accofting the mem
bers as they entered, with texts of Scripture ; he had
cried to the court of Chancery, then fitting, 'The
' land mourns becaufe of oppreffion ;' and he
had walked finging, from the door of the houfe,
through Weftminfter-hall, to the pillory in Palace-
yard, which confined his friend. When Nayler
was again pilloried, and burnt in the forfehead, he
had kiffed him, and licked his wound ; and now,
at Briftol, while Nayler was dragging after a cart-
horfe, and followed by the fcourge. Rich rode
.before him bare-headed, and fung, ' Holy, Holy.'
Rich, however, does not feem to have been .emi
nent enough among the Quakers, for parliamentary
animadverfion. Rich remained without punifhment.
Nayler was fent frora Briftol to his clofe confinc:-
ment in Bridewell, London ; where he remained
a prifoner until the 8tli of September,' 1659, at
which time he was liberated by parliament. On
his liberation, he, went to Briftol, the chief fcene
of his offence ; at which city, in a public meeting,
he made a confeffion of his fault in fo affefting a
manner, as to draw tears from moft of thofe who
were prefent ; and to occafion his reconciliation
with many who had been eftranged frora him.
There is no doubt that he had raade a good ufe of
the folitude which his confinement afforded, and
the alteration effefted in his conduft towards his
friends, the Quakers, quickly produced a return
of their friendfhip and fellowfliip : fo that he ap
pears to have been as clofely united to the body as
before ; and not to have occafioned in it any rent
or fchifin, as has been infinuated,*
* Robert Barclay, in his piece called,/ William MitcheU nnmaiked '
has the following expreffions concerning James Nayler. (See p. 84 of
(he folio edition of his work.) ' The ftory of James Nayler, wilch'ha
f.fpbjoins, any may obferve to be merely brought in to render iis

87
A part of the fentence of Nayler, had been
the deprivation of materials for writing. Never
thelefs he certainly procured them, for he wrote
and even publifhed feveral pamphlets and papers
during his imprifdnraent, fome of them relating"
to his fall, and his reftpration. The following
extrafts will fliow the temper of his raind, and his
own opinion of his. cafe. ,
' Dear brethren, my heart;is bi"oken this day for
' the offence that I have occafioned to God's truth
' and people, and efpecially to you, who, in dear
* love, followed rae, feeking me in faithfulnefs to
' God ; which I rejefted, being bound wherein I-
' could not come forth, till God's hand brought me,
' to .whofe lo-ve I now corifefs. Unlefs the Lord
' himfelf keep you from me, I befeech you let no-
' thing elfe hinder your coming to me, that I raight
' have your help in the Lord. In the mercies of
' Chrift Jefus, this I beg of you, as if it was your
' own cafe. Let rae not be forgotten by you.'
. - The following was -delivered to the parliament..
' Chrift Jefus, the Tramanuel, of whofe fufferings
' the Scriptures declare, him alone I confefs before
' men ; for whofe fake I haVe denied whatever
' was dear to rae in this world, that I might win
' him,' and be found in him, and npt in myfelf,
' whofe life and virtue I find daily manifeft in my
' odious, and fill up the paper, though indeed i;i tends no ways to oiir "
' difadvantage, he being in that thing, and' at that time altogether
' denied by as; and has fmce in print freely acknowledged his fall in
' that hour of temptation; of whofe flEcere repentance and true
' return to the fellowftiip of the truth, we have had many evident
•tokens.' And in p. '876, ' Apology vindicated,' in anfwer to an
'Examination by John Brown,' &c.. more at large. ' 'But the
• poor man thinks, (it is like) he has hit the, nail on the head to .
' purpofe, when he falya-.'p. 54*, upon this fhbjeiS, Oiie filing tiaould
' afli, .nvhat he\ tbiniieth of thai honour and ivorjhip i'jat tvas given to yames
' Uayler, as be rode into Brijtet, Oa. 24, 1656.'' I anfwer, I think it was
' both wicked and 'abominabte, and fo do the People called QUak'eW;
' who thereupon difavowed him, and all thofe that had a hand in it.'
F4

•88
« mortal body (which is ray eternal joy and hope of
' glory), whom alone I feek to ferve in fpirit, foul,
'and body, night and day, according to the
* meafure of grace working in me, that in rae he
' may be-glorified, whether by life pr death ; and
« for his fake I fuffer all things, that he alone. may
* have the glory of ray change, whofe work alone
' is in me : even to that eternal Spirit be glpry,
* and ,to the Lamb, for ever. But to afcribe this
* name, power, and virtue to James Nayler, or to
' that which had a beginning, and muft return to
' duft ; or for that to be exalted or worfhipped ;
' to me is a great idolatry, and with the fpirit pf
• Jefus in rae it is condemned : which fpirit leads
* to lowlinefs, meeknefs, and Ipng-fuffering. So>
' having an opportunity 'given, -vvith readinefs, J am
' willing, in the fiear of God the Father, in honour
* to Chrift Jefus, and to take off all offences frora
* every fimple heart, this to declare to all the
* world, as the truth pf , Chrift Is. in me, withoiit
' guile or deceit : daily finding it to be my work to
* feek peace in truth with afl men, in that Spirit.'
But the paper frora which the following is ex-
trafted, feeras to contain raore refpefting his judg-,
ment of thofe particular circumftance^ which haye
brought him into public notice, than any other :
It was written foon after his releafe, and cannot,
therefore, be fufpefted of being fabricated in order
to obtain it. ;
* Glory to God Almighty who riileth in the
' heavens, and in whofe hands are all the kingdoms
' of the earth ; who raifeth up and cafteth down at
' his will ; who hath ways to confound the exalta-
* tion of man, and to chaftife bis children, and to
* niake man know himfelf to be as grafs before
« him i whofe judgments are above the higheft of

89
* men, and his pity reacheth the deepeft mifery ;
' and the arm of his mercy is underneath, to lift up
the prifoner out of the pit, and to faye fuch as
truft in hira frora the great deflruftibn, whieh
vain man, through his folly, brings upon hirafelf;
who hath delivered my foul from darknefs, and
made way for^ my freedom out of the prifon-
hpufe,. Let his name be exalted for ever, and
let all flefh fgar before hira, whofe breath is life
to his own, but a confuraing fire to the adverfary.
And to the Lord Jefus Chrift be everlafting do-
rainion upon earth ; and his kingdom above all
the powers of darknefs; even that Chrift of
whora the Scriptures declare, which was, and is,
and is to come, the light of the world to all ge
nerations ; who hath been the rock of my fal-
vation ; and his Spirit hath given patience and
quietnefs to ifty foul in deep affliftion; even, for
his name's fake, praifes for ever !
' But coudemned for ever be all thofe falfe wor-
fhips, with which any have Idofized my perfon Iq
the night of my temptation, when the power of
darknefs was above. All their cafting of their
clothes in the way, their bowings and fmgings,
and all the reft of thofe wild aftions, which did
any ways tend to difhonour the' Lord, or draw
the minds of any from the meafure of Chrift'
Jefus in themfelves, to look at flefh, which is as
grafs, or to afcribe that to the vifible, whicli be
longs to Chrift Jefus ; all that I condemn, by
which the pure name of the Lord hath been any
ways blafpheraed through rae in the tirae of
temptation ; or the fpirits of any people grieved,
that truly loved the Lord Jisfus, throughout the
whole world, of what fort foever. This offence
J cgnfefs, whicli hath been forrow of heart, that

90
* the [enehiy of man's peace in Chrift fliould get
' this advantage in tbe night of my trial, to ftir up
' wrath and offences in the creation of God ; a
* thing, the fimplicity of my heart' did not intend,
* the Lord knows, who, in his eiidlefs love, hath
* given me power over it, to condemn it. And
* alfo that. letter which was fent to me to Exeter,
* when I was in prifon, with thefe words. Thy
• narne fhall be no more yames Nayler,' but "Jefus ',
' this I judge -to , be written from the - imaginations,
^ and a fear ftruck me when I firft faw it, and fo I
* put it in my pocket clofe, not intending any
* fhpiild fee: it ; which they finding on me, fpread it
* abroad ; which the fimplicity of my heart never
' owned, So this Ideny alfo, that the name of
'Chrift Jefus was received inftead of Jaraes'Nayler;'
'for that name is to the feed to all generations/
' and he that hath the Son hath the name, which
* is life and power, the falvation and the unftipn,
* into which name all the children of light are bap-
*r tized. And all thofe ranting wild fpirits, which
• gathered about me in that time of darknefs j and
* all their wild aftions and wicked words, againft
* the honour of God and his pure Spirit and
'people, I- deny that bad fpirit, the power and the
'-works thereof: and as far as I gave advantage,
' through watit of judgment, for that evil fpirit in
* any to arife, I take.fliame to myfelf juftly ; having
'.fornjerly, had power over that fpirit in judgment
' and^idifcerning, wherever it was ; which -darknefs
* came over me through want of watchfulnef^ and
' pbedience.tp the pure eye of God, and diligently
'.mlBding the reproof of life, which condemns the
'adulterous fpirit. And it is in my heart to con-
' fefs to Gpd, and before men, my folly and
* offence in that day. Yet there were many things

91 . ,
* formed againft me in that day to take away my
? life, and bring fcandal upon the truth, of which I
' am not guilty at all : as that accufation, as if I
' had committed adultery with fome of thofe women
* who came with us from Exeter prifon, arid alfo
* thofe who were with rae at Briftol, the night be-
' fbre I fuffered there ; of both which accufations
' I am clear before God, who kept riie in that day,
? both in thought and deed, as to all women, as a
' child, God is ray record.' After an exhortation
to the reader, how to behave under temptation,
and a warning againft relying on gifts, wifdom, and
knowledge, the piece concludes thus: 'This I
' have learned in the" deep, and in fecret, when I
' was alone; and now openly' declare, in the day
' of thy mercy, O Lord ! ' Glory to. the Higheft foir
' evermore, who hath thus far fet me free, to
' praife his righteoufnefs, and his mercy, and to
' the Etemal, Invifible, Pure God, over all, be
' fear, obedience, and glory, evermore.' Amen.
James Nayler did not long furvive his imprifont-
ment. He died in Oftober 1660, and but little
account is tranfmitted to us, refpefting him, after
his being fet at liberty. George Whitehead, who
lodged with him, at a houfe in London^ in 1659
and 1660, bears this teftimony of him, ' that he
' was revived by the Lord's power, and in meafure
' reftored to his ancient teftimony, and to bear the
' farae pubhcly in divers parts of the nation, as the
' Lord enabled him, both in his rainiftry and writ-
' ings : and,' adds Whitehead, * he walked in
' much brotherly love and fimplicity among us, until
' his end came.'
• * GeoBge Whitehead alfo mentions another cireumftance ' refpeaing
James Nayler, "which I find difficult to underftand, unleTs it be fnppbfed
that NaT'le* had occafional refpite from his canfinement. Georgp

^ - 92
We have alfo a fliort account of Nayler, from
Thomas EUwood, who, before he became a mem
ber of the fociety of Friends, had met with him,
while yifiting at Ifaac Penington's at Chalfont in
Buckinghamfliire. Edward Burrough, being alfo
prefent, was difcourfing with the father of Thomas
.Ellwood, refpefting Predeftination ; which doftrine
EUwood the father efpoufed ; when Nayler inter-
¦pofing, ' handled the fubjeft with fo much perfpi-
* cuity and clear demonftration, that his reafoning
* feemed to be irreiiftible :' and this furprifed
young Ellwood the more, as the appearance of
Nayler was that of a plain fimple hufbandnjan
or fhepherd.
Since the firft arrival of James Nayler in London,
in the year 1654, it doth not appear that he had
ever revifited his habitation ; If Indeed, at all fince
the time of his quitting it in 1652. At length he fet
out homewards, and was noticed by a friend, as he
paffed through Huntingdon, to be In a frame of
mind fo awful, as that he appeared to be redeeriied
frora the world. It is not known whether, foon
after this he was fuddenly taken ill, or had been
robbed and abufed. A countryraan found hira, in
the latter part of theday, in a field near King's
•Rippon ; and he was conveyed to the houfe of a
friend at Holra. A phyfician attended him, and
he was inquired of, whether he defired to fee any
©f his London friends ; which he declined. On
having his clothes fhifted, he faid, ' You have
* refrefhed ray body, the Lord refreft^your fouls ;'
Whitehead relates the manner of his fall, as he himfelf had related it
when they were walking together in Weftmoreiand, in 1657 ; in which
year, it appears, in Whitehead's life, that he was in that county ; whilft "
©n the other hand, one oi Nayler's papers is f^d to be written in Bride
well, in idj8 ; and it doth not feem that the date is an error of the
prefs, and Whitehead was, as hath been jnentioasd, ifl London in i6?q
and 1600. *''•

(

93
not long after which he departed in peace, agedt
about 44 years. His remains were interred at
Rippon. About two hours before his deceafe
he is faid to have uttered the following Words :
' There is a fpirit that I feel, that delights to do no
' evil, nor to revenge any wrong, but dielightS to
* endure all things, in hope to enjoy its oWn in the
* end. Its hope is to outlive all wrath and conten-
* tion, and to weary out all exaltation and cruelty,
* or whatever Is of a nature contrary to Itfelf. It
fees to the end of all temptations : as it bears no
evil in Itfelf, fo it conceives none in thoughts' to
' any dther. If It be betrayed, it bears it ; for its
' ground and fpring is the mercies and forgivenefs
* of God. Its crown Is raeekn'efs, its life is ever-
' lafting love, unfeigned ; and takes its kingddni
* with intreaty, and not with contention, and keeps
* it by lowlinefs of raind. In God alone it can re-
* joice, though none elfe regard it, or can owfriits
' fife. It is conceived in forrow, and brough,t
* forth without any to pity it ; nor doth it murmur
* at grief and oppreffion. It lilsver rejoiceth but
through fufferings 5 for with the world's joy, it
is raurthered. I found it alone, being forfaken.
' I have fellpwfhip therein with thera who lived in
* dens, and defolate- places of ihe earth: who,
' through death, obtained this refurreftion, and
* eternal holy life.*
During the time of James Nayler's travels and
imprifonraent, he had frequent recourfe ro the'
prefs. Sorae of his Writings were doftrinal, and
many of thefra controverfial. Some of the latter
contain an afp6rlty of language, which appears ill
adapted to coiiviiice either the opporierit, or his
adherents. The writings of Nayler, however, are
not eminent for thefe; and, in eftimating how

«

far an author has exceeded the .point of right,
we fhouid allow for. the provocation; and great
provocation was certainly given to our elder
friends, by the mifapprehenfion of thc:ir principles;
This occafioned their ad-verfaries to charge thera
with opinions (often monftroUs enough) which
they did not hold. Such however is the impatience
of ,,our minds, that we find it eafier to cry down
an opinion which claflies with our own, than to
examine it with coolnefs ; and to inveigh againft its
author, than to defire his inftruftion. While this
is , the cafe, debate is not likely to fift out truth ;
but when the time fliall come that fuch as.^ profefs
the name pf ' Chrift-, fliall infufe into their contro-
verfies all the gentlenefs, forbearance, . and love,
which his religion enjoins, it is .probable that Chrif
tianity wifi be advanced, by the .fuperior conviftion-
which will attend the difcuffion of its'votaries. May
the mind that is convinced of thefe truths, fuffer^
them to operate as a rule ;of its conduft;; .and thus
be one to carry on the work which it defires to fee
accompfiflied. A colleftion was made in 1716, of
fuch of Nayler's writings as were thought fuitable
for reimprefliion ; but this has alfo been long fince
out of print.
On a review of the life and Writings of James
Nayler, he appears to liavabeen a man of no mean
abifities, and of great fincerity ; but tinftured with.
what will generaUy be efteemed an excefs of cre
dulity ; riot only as to his own gifts, but, alfo in-
eftiraating the pretenfions of others.,' But he feems
remarkable for no quality more than for patience
under fuffering ; and quiet refignation to what he
believed to be Divinely enjoined or permitted. To
this quality, as the means^ we may attribute his '

95
reftoration to foundnefs of judgment, and the calm-
nefs of his clofing moments. .
After all, probably his fife will be viewed
through the medium which each one has been accuf-
tomed to ufe. The fcoffer at religion will think
him a fool ; the deift a raadman ; the profeffor of
religion, who meafures all things by his finite un
enlightened reafon, and rejefts the notion of Divine
influence, will exult at his fall ; but the believer in
this influence, who counts the coft of his faith, and
has defcried the dangers of the right hand as well
as of the left, will at leaft view his ftory with in
ftruftion ; if not be induced by it to adhere raore
clofely to that guide, -which alone can preferve raan
from falling ; but which repeated deviations raay
conceal from the view.

SUMMARY

HISTORY, DOCTRINE, AND DISCIPLINE,

FRIENDS:
WRITTEN AT THE DESIRB
or THI
MEETING FOR SUFFERINGS,
IN tONDON.

ADVERTISEMENT.

Tan TraS may be had feparately ; alfo Otrman and French
Editions ofit. A Tranflatlon Into the Welfh Language is
preparing for the Prefs,

99-

INTRODUCTION.

Although more than a century hath elapfed
fmce we. became a diftinft religious fociety; yet^
from feveral cauffes, our principles at- this day are
frequently either not underftood, or mifreprefented.
Many books, explanatory of our tenets and prac
tices, have indeed been publifhed by authors of
our own profeffion. Sorae of thefe are more dlf-
fufe than every reader hath leifure or inclination
to perufe ; others, more compendiousj do not ex
tend to all the particulars which we ourfelves wifh
to be known, or with which inquirers raay defire
to be acquainted. It is therefore judged expedient
to prefent to fuch as are difpofed to be rightly In
formed refpefting us, a furaraary account of our
origin and hiftory, of our doftrines, and of our
difcipline ; which raay give the reader a true,
though general, reprefentation ; and then, as lei
fure or inclination raay allow or induce hira, he
' may render his knowledge of us, and of our prin
ciples, raore particular, by having recourfe to fome
of the publications already hinted at. To fuch a
purpofe, among others, the works of George Fox,
William Sewel, William Penn, and Robert Barclay,
are well adapted : and to thofe who may be thus
Induced to inquire into our principles, we would
G 2

alfo recomracnd the exaraple of the Bereans, who
examined the Holy Scriptures to find if " thofe
'* things were fo." *
It may, however, be remarked, that the Gofpel,
which we believe to be the higheft as well as the
laft difpenfation of God to man, can never be fo
well underftood, as when it is eonfidered as having
the boundlefs love of the Great Creator for its
caufe, and the falvation of the whole human race
for its end and aim. ^
It feems to be tirae for the fincere in heart to
waive the cereraonials of religion (concerning which
there hath been enough of contention and ani-
mofity), for the fake of its effence. In proportion
as raen are gathered to the one thing needful, the
governraent of Chrift's Spirit in the heart, they
lofe the inclination for contention, and are in t;he
true way to unity. Then can they breathe forthahe
priraitlve and perraanent goTpel-language, " Glory
" to God in the higheft, and on earth peace,
good- will, toward men."f
* A<38 xYJi. ir. f Luke ii. 14.

cc

101

A
SUMMARY, &c.
CHAPTER I.

HISTORY.

Ihe beginning of the feventeerith century is
known to have been a time of great diffention in
England, refpefting religion. Many pious perfons
had been diffatisfied with the fetilement of the
Church of England in the reign of Queen Ehza
beth. Various focieties of Differiters had accord
ingly. arifen ; fome of whom evinced their Sincerity
by grievous fufferings, under the intolerance of
thofe Who governed church affairs, (a) But thefe
focieties, notWithftanding their honeft zeal, feem
to have flopped fliort in their progrefs towards a
complete reformation ; (^) and, degenerating Into
•formality, to have left their moft enhghtened mem
bers ftill to lament the want of fomething raore in-
ftruftlve, and confolatory to the foul, than the moft
rigorous obfervance of their ordinances had ever
produced. Thus diffatisfied and difconfolate, they
were ready to follow any teacher, who feeraed able
(a) Se-«rel,p. i, 6. eS. l^a». {i) Penn, vol. j, p. »ii, ai». edit. %j9t.
03 •

102
to direft them, to that light and peace of which
they felt the need, Many fuch in fucceffion eur
gaged their.attentlon; until., finding the iufufficiency
of them all, they ' withdrew from the comraunion
of every vifible church; and dwelt' retired, and atr
tentive to the inward ftate of their own rainds ;
often -deeply diftreffed for the want of that true
knowledge of God, which they faw to be neceffary
for falvation, and for which, according to their
ability, they fervently prayed. Thefe fincere
breathings of fpirit being anfwered by the extent
fion of forae degree pf heavenly confolation, they
became convinced, that as the heart of man Is the
fcene of the tempter's attacks. It jriuft alfo be that
of the Redeeraer's vlftory. Witli renewed fer
vency, therefore, they fought his appearance in
their minds ; and thus, being .renewedly furnifti,ed
^'ith his faving light and help, they not only be
came inftrufted in the things pertaining to their
own falvation ; bpt they difcoyercd many praftices
in the -world, ^hich have a fhew of refigjpn, to
be neverthelefs tfie effeft of the unfubjefted will of
|nan, apd inconfiftent with the genuine fimplicity
pf the Truth.
- Thefe people .were at firft hidden from each
pther, and each probably conceiyed his own heart
4.0 be the fingle repofitory pf a difcovery fo imr
.portant ; but it-, did not confift with divine good-
jiefs, that the candle thus lighted fliould ' always
remain under the bed, or the bufheL ('cj Our
honourable elder, G. Fox, who. had fignally ex
perienced the affiifting difpenfatjpns which we have
defcribed, and had J^lfo been quickened by the
^jggifediaie tonches of divine love.j couldnot fatisfy
liis apprehenfions of duty to God, without bearing

103
'public teftimony againft the comraon modes of wor
fhip, and direfting the people where to firid thfe
like confolatiori and inftruftion. (d) As he travelled
in this fervice, he met with divers of thofe feeking
perfons who had been exercifed in a fimilar manner:
thefe readily received his teftimony ; feveral of
thera alfo became preachers ofthe fame doftrine; (i?)
multitudes were convinced of the reality of this
inward manifeftation ; (/) and ftiany meetings were
fetdcd. Thofe who attempt to detach the people froth
the teachings of men, muft expeft for their eneriiles
ftiofe men who make a^gairi of teaching. Such
was the lot of cur firft friends : and laws, rtiade
either in. the times of popery, or fince the reforni-
ation againft non-conforriiifts, ferved as the raeans
of gratifying the jealoufy of' the priefts, and the
intolerance of the raagiftrates. Indeed, at thfe
tirae Friends firft attrafted public notice, legal pre
tences \yere not always thought neceffary to' juftify
the abufe which they fuffered.(^) It was during tlfe
time of the coramoiiwealth, when oppofition td a
national rainiftry which was fuppofed to be pecu-
liarly reformed, was deemed an offence of no fmall
import. Much perfonal abufe was accordingly
beftowed ; (/;) imprifonriieiit was commPii, and cor
poral puriifhment frequent. Imprifonraent was
often rendered more fevere and difgufting by the
.cruelty of particular magiftrates, and from the
numbprs which were confined together; and ftripes,
under pretence of vagrancy, w^re inflifted without
regard to fex, and on perfons of unimpeached
charafter, and of good circumftances in the world.(/)
/rf/Fox'6j9urnal,'p.i4il5>*l-edit. 1765. ^«;itid.49- (/) I Cor.xil..^.
(g) Fox 16., ('A;Beffe'sSuffering5of tlie People called Quakers, ch. 6. awi
Sj. itnd paffim, {tJ Ibid. Suff. pref. and paflim.

G 4

104
George Fox (/^) was one of the firft of our Friends
who was iraprifoned. He was confined at Notting
ham in the year 1649, for having publicly oppofed
a preacher, who had afferted that the more fure
word of prophecy, mentioned 2 Pet. I. 19, was the
Scripture; George Fox , declaring that it was the
Holy Spirit : and in the following year, being
brought before two juftices in Derbyfhire, (/) one of
thera, fcoffing at George Fox, for having bidden
hira, and thofe about him, to .tremble at the word
of the Lord, gave to^ our predeceffors the name of
fakers; (ni) an appellation which foon became and
hath remained our moft ufual denomination ; but
they themfelves adopted, and have tranfmitted to
.ns, the endearing appellation of Friends.
Although Oliver Cromwell did not -employ his
authority to put a ftop to perfecution, it doth not
appear that he was inclined to promote it. He
gave feveral of our Friends accefs to hira ; and once
in particular, when George Fox had. been brought
to him as a prifoner, («) he releafed him after a con
siderable time fpent in conference, on which occafion
he confeffed that our Friends were ' a people rifen
' up that he qpuld not win, eidier with gifts, ho-
* nours, offices, or places,' (a)
Perfecution however continued ; but when
.Charles IL on tl^e profpeft of his reftoration, iffued
from Breda, amongft pdier things, his declaration
for liberty of confclence, it might well have been
expefted that Friends would be permitted to exer^
cife their religion without moleftatipn. Yet during
this reign thfey not only -were harraffed with the
oath of alleg^anf e, which, in common with all oaths,,
tbey fcrupted to take, and by which they often m-
curred tedious Imprifonraent, and not unfrequently
/^; Fox, 44. /•/;n>id.39. Cw) Sewel, a^. («)Ibid.98. (»)ibid,99.

105
premunire: but new laws (/>) were made, by which
even their meetings for worfliip fubjefted thera ta
punifliment. The king, as a branch of the legiflature, joined
in the enafting of thefe laws ; neverdielefs he did
not feera in all cafes to countenance feverity ; for
in an inftance wherein he afted Independendy of
the parliaraent, he was the means of affording re
lief in the moft fanguinary perfecution which our
Friends ever experienced. This was in New Eng.^
land, where it was made penal for a friend even
to refide.
The firft friends (q) who arrived at Bofton, were
woraen. » Thefe were iraprifoned, and otherwife
cruelly treated. The date of this tranfaftion is
1656, The following year the fcourge was era-
ployed, and a woman (?') is alfo recorded to have
been the firft who fuffered ftripes. She was the
wife of a tradefinan in I..ondon, and had njade a
voyage to Bofton, to warn the people againft
perfecution. Great numbers underwent this punifh-j'
merit ; but ftripes proving infufficient, to deter our
Friends from the exercife of their religious duty, iri
going to fuch places, and performing fuch fervices,
as they believed to be required by the Divine will ;
it was next attempted to difcourage them by a law (f)
for cutting off their ears. This was executed in
vain ; arid accordingly the intolerance of the perfons
in power produced another, which fubjefted Friends
p banifhraent on pain of death. Their conftancy,(^) ,
however, was not thus to be fhal^en, and four
friends, amongft whoin alfo was a woman^ were
hanged at !^oftpn?^
¦ ff) i6th Car., n. cap. 4. aand Car. II. cap. I. Alfo 13th and i4tli
ipar. li. cap. I. (y) Sewel 160. frj lb. 170. {1) t>. 194) ijS CtJ lb,
;f 99, 5j»6 to J3J, »76.

106
In this extremity, Samuel Shattock, (u) a Friend
Who had been baniflied under the laft mentioned
law, came to England ; and application being
made to the king by Edward Burrough, who was
admitted to a perfonal audience, Charles granted
his mandamus (dated. 9th September, 1661) to
flop the feverities in New England ; and appointed
Samuel Shattock his deputy, to carry it to Boftpn.
Nor' were the good offices of Charle§ 11. confined
to our Friends of Nev/ England. Notwithftanding
the continuance of perfecution in Eugland, the king
generally appeared inclinable to grant relief, and
frequently received the perfonal application of
George Whitehead('u)and others, on behalf of their
liiffering brethren. In 1672, (jc) he releafed, under
the grccit feal, fuch friends as were iraprifoned on
account of the oatli of allegiance, to the number
of about four hundred ; and the fociety had forae
refpite from p~etfecUtion ; but, not being protefted
by law, perfecutors and informers foon recom-
mericed their oppreffion, and at the king's deceafe,
abdutfiftfeen hundred were in prifon, or prifoners.(y)
Although the praftice of inflifting corporal punifh-
tnent on Friends, feems in England to have fallen
into difufe at the reftoration ; yet the reign of
Charles II. rauft be eonfidered as the time of the
greateft fuffering to our fociety. The iraprifonraents
Were long, often terminating only with the life of the
prifoner. In this reign alfo, the crouds fliut up to
gether, increafed, in many places, the common fuffer
ings of confinement ; which, in fome, were alfo aiig,
Mented by the violent tempers of magiftrates, or
by the barbarity of gaolers. The fines impofed by
the new laws, were exafted with a rigour that gene-
W Sewel, j8o, a8l. (^) G. Whitehead's Life, paflim. (*¦) Ibid pVge 35 1^
{^f^ Sewel, 586, 1684.

107
rally oppireffed the fufferer, aud fomfctiines left him
ne-arly-delbtute of houfehold goods,; and feversjl
families experienced a feparation of the near con^
nexions of life, by the execution of that law (z)
which flibjefted our -Friends io banifhraent.
Ic is wdl kriown that James II. to favour (as is
/uppofed) the religion to which he was attached,
fufpended the operation of the penal laws againft
differiters. Our Friends had their fhare in the benefit
arifing from this meafure ; but it was not until the
reign of king William, that they obtained forae
degree of legal proteftion. Befides their difufe bf
the national forms of worfliip, their refufing to
fwear and to pay tithes, had been among the
principal caoifes of their fufferings. In, the. reign
of William and Mary, an aft was made, (a) which,
with a few exceptions, allowed to their afBrmatioa
the legal force of an oath ; and provided a lef^
oppreffive mode of recovering tithes, under a cer
tain amount. Thefe proyifions were made perpetual
In the reign of George l.(^) and thus Friends, who
received the advantage pf the aft of toleratioUj in
common with other differiters, have been in a great
meafure relieved from perfecution,
At the fame time that the fociety in England jsj^-
perienced the vicilEtudes which have been thus
briefly mentioned, fimilar circumftances befel our
Friends in Ireland. In that; nation alfo, they pro
pagated their principles, .fettled meetings, fuffered
perfecutiori, and were at length relieved by law. (c)
The means of perfecution, though now generally
condemned by our coyntryraeUj are not wholly
¦ Jz) l6Car. {I.e. 4. (<i) 6th & 8th -WTillisim 111. c. 34. C^J ift Geo.t.c.6.
fcj 'Thofe who are defirous of particular informatiijn refpeAing
Friends in Ireland, hiay confult Edmundfon'sjournal, andRatty VHiftory
^f tl^e ^ife and Progref^ of the PpopU called Quakers.

108
removed ; and we are ftill liable to fuffer in the
Exchequer, and in the Ecclefiaftical court: but
this muft be underftood only with refpeft to Great
Britain and Ireland ; for in America, the people
at prefent are not bound to fupport a national
miniftry ; nor, when this was in fome parts the
cafe, were methods of enforcing payment employed,
fo tedious and fo fevere as In England. (<^).
• It has already been mentioned, that our Friends
above a century ago, had made their appearance
in New England ; from whence all the violence of
their perfecutors had not been able to expel them.
They were alfo early to be found in other colonies,
in divers of which they underwent perfecution ; but
on the acquifition of Pennfylvania by William Penn,
many of thera were induced to remove into that
new province ; which foon became, and ftill re
mains to be,- the largeft fettlement of Friends In
America.— rThey are fettled however In moft of
the other ftates and provinces of North America ;
and although they have enjoyed a great fhare of
tranquillity, yet during the comraotions which
terininated in the feparation of the United States
from the dominion of Great Britain, Friends were
involved in gireat trouble, by refufing to join in
the military fervices which were required of them ;
and many were reduced, from circumftances of eafe,
if not of affluence, to the verge of want, by the
cxceffive felzures which were raade of their pro
perty, to recover the fines irapofed for their
refufing to ferve perfonally, or by fubftitute, in
war.
¦ ^t^}^'^ -worthy of remarlt, tljat in the province of Maffachufets.
jn which the moft fanguinary laws had b.en.made and put into execution
againft Friends, the firft law was raade exempting them from 'contri-
buting to- the fupport of the public miniftry: an aA of arembly havins
jafffd fpr that purpofe m 1 73 1 , Jonathan Belcher being governor *

109
CHAPTER IL

DOCTRINE.
General Belief. — Univerfal and faving Light."-'
Worfhip. — Minyiry.^-rWomens' preaching. — Bap
tifm andthe Supper. — IfniverfalGrace. — Perfe^ion.
~-^Oaths and War.-— Government. — Deportment.-^
Conclufion.
We agree with other profeffors of the Chriftian
narae, in the befief of one eternal God, the Crea^
tor and Preferver of the univerfe ; and in Jefus
Chrift his Son, the Meffiah, and Mediator of the
new covenant. (<z) ¦
When- we fpeak .of the gracious difplay of the
love of God to mankind, in the miraculous con
ception, birth, life, miracles, death, refiirrcftion,
and afcenfion of our Saviour, we prefer the ufe of
fuch terms as we find in Scripture ; and contented
with that knowledge which Divine wifdom hath
feen meet to reveal, we. attempt, not tp explain
thofe, myfteries which remain under the veil ; ne-\^er-
tlielefs we acknowledge and affert the Divinity of
Chrift, who is the wifdom and power of God unto
falvation. (bf
To Chrift alone we give the title of the Word of
God (/f), and not to the Scriptures ; although we
highly efteera thefe facred writings, Infubordination
to the Spirit (^), frora which they were given forth;
and we;^old, with the apoftle Paul, that they are
able to make wife unto falvation, through faith
which is in Chrift Jefus. (e)
(ul Hc1». xii. !I4. (i) 1 Cor. i. 44. (cj John i. «. (i) iS^et, J. SI.
ft), ir Tini. iii. I j.

110
We reverence thofe moft excellent precepts which
are recorded in Scripture to have -been delivered by
our great Lord, and we firraly believe that they
are prafticable, and binding on every Chriftian;
and that in the life- to come, every man will be re
warded according, to his works (/)., And .further
it is our belief, that; in order to "enable^ mankind
to put in praftice thefe facred precepts, many of
which are contradiftory to the unregenerate will of
man (^), every man coming into the world^" is
endued with a meafure of the light, gt^ce, or good
Spirit of Chrift; by, which, as it is attended to^ h*
is enabled to diftinguifhgood-from evil,and tocorreft
the diforderly paffions and corrupt propenfities of
his nature, which raere reafon is altogether infuffi
cient- to overcome. For all that belongs to man i^
fallible, and within the reach of> temptation ; but
this Divine grace, which comes by him who hath
overcome the world (/), is, to thofe who humbly
and fincerely feek it, an alUfufiicient and > prefent
help in- time of need. By this, the fnares ofthe
enemy are detefted, his alluremeuts avoided, and
deliverance is experienced through faith in its
effeftuaroperation : whereby the foul is tranflated
out of the kingdora of darknefs, and' from- under
theppwer-of fatan, into the iriarvellous light and.
kingdom- of-the Son of God.
Being thus perfuaded that man, without the Spirit
of 'Chrift- inwardly revealed, can'do nothing to the
glory ofGodj or to- .-effeft- -his own falvation ; we
think this influence efpecially- necefliiry to the perl
fprmancc of the higheft- a-ft of which nhe -human
mind is capable; even the- worfhip 6f the Father
of-iights and bf fpirits, in fpirit and in truth': there*
/7;M«t.»yi,87. , fgjjokai..^,, (iJ Ibid. x-fir35r- ,

Ill
fore we confider as obftruftions to pure W/orfhip,
all forms which divert the attention of the mind
from the fecret influence of this unftioil from the
Holy One (k). Yet, although true worfhip is not,
confined-to time and place, we think it incumbent on
Chriftians to raeet often together (/), in teftiraonjt
of their dependence on the Heayenly Father, and
for a renewal of their fpiritual ftrength : neverthe
lefs, in the performance of worfliip, we dare not
depend, for our acceptance with him, on a formal
repetition of the, words and experiences of others;
but we believe it to be our duty, to lay afide tbe
aftivity ofthe imagination, andito wait in filence to
have a true fight of our condition, beftowed upon
us: believing even a fingle' figli Tw), arifing from
fuch a fenfe of our infirmities, and of the need WG
have of Divine, help, to be more acceptable to God,
than any performances, however fpecious, which.
originate in the will of man.
From what has been faid refpefting worfliip, it
follows, that the miniftry we approve rauft have its
origin from the fame : foiurce : for that which i^
needfid for. man's own direftion, and for his ac
ceptance with God (n), rauft be eminently fo to
enable him to be helpful to others. Accordingly
we believe that the. renewed afliftancc of the lighi
and powgr of Chriftj, is iiidifpenfably neceffary foF
all true .miiiuftry ; a^.that this holy influencg.is not
at our comraand, or to be, procured' by ftudy,/ but
is "die, free gift of God to chofen and devoted
fervants. Hence arifes. our teftimony againft
preaching for hire, in contradiftaoa-. to . Ghicift's
pofitive comraand, " Freely ye have received, freely
give;" (o). and hence our confcieritious.refufal to
fupport fuch miniftry, by tithes or other means.
fiJtJohnii.iQ.ai.. /¦/; Heh..!c. 35. /of^t Rom.TJii.at
fnj Jer. x»jii. 30 to 32. ftj Mttt. \. i.

112
As we dare not encourage any rainiftry, but that
which we believe to fpring .frora the influence of
the Holy Spirit, fo neither dare we attempt to re-
ftrain this influence to perfons of any condition In
life, or to the male fex alone ; but, as male and
female are one in Chrift, we allow fuch of the fe
male fex as we believe to be endued with a right
qualification for the miniftry, to exercife their gifts
for the general edification of the church : and this
liberty we efteera a peculiar mark of the gofpel
difpenfation, as foretold by the prophet Joel (/>),
and noticed by the apoftle Peter (jj).
There are two ceremonies in ufe among moft
profeffors of the Chriftian narae, Water-baptifm,
and what is termed the Lord's Supper. The firfl
of thefe is generally efteemed the effential means
of initiation into the church of Chrift; and the
latter of maintaining coraraunion with hira. But
as we have been convinced, that nothing fhort of
his redeeming power. Inwardly revealed, can fet
the foul free from the thraldom of fm ; by this
power alone we believe falvation to be effefted.
We hold that as there Is one Lord and one faith,
(r) fo his baiptifra is one, in nature and operation ;
^hat nothing fhort of it can raake us liying members
of his myftical, body ; and that the baptifm with
water, adminiftered by his fore-runner John, be
longed, as the latter confeffed, to an inferior and
decreafing difpenfation. (j) »
With refpeft to the other rite, we believe that
communion between Chrift and his church is not
maintained by that, nor any other external perfor
mance, but only by a real partkipation of his Divine
nature (j) through faith j that this is the fupper
(fi Joel ii. a8, ap. fj) Afts ii. i6, 1 7. (r) Eph. it. J.
(s) John iii, 30, («) a Pet. 1.4.

ajlud.ed to In the Revelation (k), " Behold I ftand,
" at the door anB knock: if any man hear my.
" voice, and open the door, 1 wifi come in to himj
" and will fup .with him, and he wi,th me ;" and that
where the fubftance is attained, it is unneceflTary to-
attend -to the fhadow ; which, doth not confer grace,
and concerning which, opinions fo different, and
animofities fo violent, have arifen.
Now, as, we thus believe that the grace of God,
which comes by Jefus Chrifl, is alone fufficient for ,
fiilvation, jwe can neither .admit that it is conferred
on. a few only, -whilft pthers are left without it;
nor, thus afferting its univerfality, can we fimit its
operation to a partial cleanfing of the fotd from, fip.,,
even in this life. We entertain, worthier nPtWfiS'*.
both of the ;power and goodnefs of our Heayenly
Father,, and belieye that he doth vouchfafe to affift-
the obedient to experience a total furrencier;of the ,
natural will, to the guidance of his pure unerring*
Spirit ; througlji whofe renewed affiftance they, arc .
enabled to bring forth fruits.unto hofinefs, and.to
ftand perfeft in their prefent rank, (fxj . „ ' . ; ; J •.
There are . not many of o,ur .ten^ts^ more gene7.j
rally .kpown than, our teftimony. againflj Oaths, au4
againft War. With refpeft to the former of thefe, ,
we abiide hterally by Chrift's, pofitive ^injunftion,
deli;vered in his' fermon on the niouiit, "Swear,,
" not at all." /jkJ From the fame facre^ colleftion,
of the i^pft excellent precepts of nioral an^ reli.
gipus duty, from the example of our Lprd hirafelf,
^3 J and frpm the. cprrefppndent cpn-vj^ipns of his ,
Spirit in oiir Jiearts, we -ar^ confiraied In the
belief that wars;. and fightings are, in their origin
and effefts, utterly repugna.ni to the gofpel ; Which ,
(».)*.ev.'viii. aD.''C»)Martt.7.48- %liii6''-I3'C(Jl;iv.ra. ,C3i>Matt.v.34,
/¦i^Mat.v. 39,44, &c.ch. xxvi. S^-Si- l-vkt xsai.si. J?hn xviikii.
H

114
flill breathes peace and good-will to men. Wc
aifo are clearly of the' judgraent, chat if the benc-
vpldnce of the Gofpel were generally prevalent in
the -minds of men, if would effeftually prevent them
from oppreffing, much more enflaving, their bre
thren (of whatever colour or , complexion), for
Whom, as for themfekeSj Chrift died ; and would
even influence JLheir conduft in their treatraent of
the brute creation-: which would np longer groan,
the viftiras of their avarice, or of their falfe ideas
of pleafure.
Some of our tenets have in former times, as
hath been fhewn, fubjefted our Friends to much
fuffering froni Governraent, though to the falutary
purpofes of Government, our principles are a
fccurity. They inculcate fubmiffion to the laws
iii all cafes wherein confcience is not violated. But
we hold, that as Chrift's kingdom is not of this
world, it is not the bufinefs of the civil magiftrate
to interfere in matters of religion ; but to maintain
the external peace and good order of the cpmmu^
nity. We therefpre think perfecution, even in the
fraalleft degree,"^ unwarrantable. We are careful-
in requiring; 'pur meriibers not to be concerned in
illicit tradie, nor in any manner to defraad the re
venue. ,It is well known that the fociety, fromjts firft
appearance, has.difufed thofe names of the months -
arid days, which having been given in honour of
the heroes or falfe gods ofthe heathen, originated
in their flattery or fuperftition ; and the cuftom
of fpeaking to a fingle perfon In the plural number,
as having arifen - alfO from motives of adulation..
Compliments, fuperfluity of apparel and ftimiture,
outward fliews of rejoicing and mourriiUg, and the
obfervation of days and jtiraca, we efteem to be

115
i^Hcompatible with the fimplicity and fincerity of a
Chriftian life ; and public diverfions, gaming, and
other vain amufements of the world, we cannot
but condemn. They are a wafte of that time which
is given us for nobler purpofes ; and divert the
attention of the mind from the fober duties of
life, and from the reproofs of inftruftion, by which
we are guided to an everiaftifig inheritance.
To Conclude, -althougli we ha^ fexhibitcd the
feveral tenets which diftinguifh our religious fociety,
as objefts of our belief ; yet wfe are fenfible that a
true and fiving faith is not produced in the raind
•of man by his own effort ; but is the free gift of
God (a) in Chrift Jefus, nouriftied and increafed
by the progreflive operation of his Spirit in our
• hearts, and our proportieaale obedience. /bJ
Therefore, although for the ¦ preferVation of the
teftimonies given us to bear, and for the peace and
good order of the fociety, we deem it necel&ry
that thqfe who are admitted into meraberfliip with
us, fhould be previoufly convinced of thofe docr
trines which we efteera effential; yet we require no
formal fubfcription to any articles, either as a con
dition of raeraberftiip, or a qualification for the
fervice of the church. We prefer the judging of
men by their fruits, and depending on the aid of
Hira, who, by his prophet, hath proraifed to be,
" a fpirit of judgment to hira that fKtet>h ih judg-
" ment. (cJ Without thisj there is a danger of
receiving nurabers into outward eomm-Unionj with^
out any addhion to that fpiritual fheepfoldj whereof
our bleffed Lord declared himfelf to be both the
door and phe ..fhepherd ; (dj). that is, fuch as know
his voice, and follpw him in the paths of obedience.
(») Eph, ii, S. (i) Jqlmvii. 1 7. (f,) Ifaish jcjtviiJ. 6. (f) John •», 7.J i*
H3

116

j^HAPTER III,

d'is c j p l I ni:.
Jts Purpofes, ^^Meetings for Difcipline.— t-Montitly
.ME'ETiJNGS.^r^Poor.—i-Convinced Perfons. — Certi
ficates of Removal.'r-r-Overfeers.^^—Mode of dealing
with Offenders^ — Arbitration. — Marriages. —
Births and Burials, -rr-^^sTERLr MB£rijNGs.—<-
^ueries.«r-Jppeah.'T~,THE Tearly MEEriNC.-^
. Women s Meetings.— r^.Meetings of Minifier? and
Elders,^-.Certificates to Minifters, — The MbeTt
JNG FOR Sufferings.— ^Conclufion.
THE purpofes which our difcipline hath chiefly
in view, are, the refief of the poor,- — the mainte^
nance of good Order,— 'the fupport of the tefti
monies which we believe it is our duty to bear tp
the wprld, — and the help and recovery of fuch as
are overtaken in faults.
In the praftice of difcipline, we think it indif-
p^enfable- that ¦ the order recomraended by Chrift
himfelf be invariably obferved : (a) " If thy brother
" fhaU trefpafs againft thee, go and tell hira his
^ fault between thee and hira alone : if he fhall
?' hear thee, thou haft gained thy brother ; but if
^' he will not hear thee, then take with thee one
fi or t^o more, that in the mouth of two or tfiref-
<ji) Mat. sriii, ij tc 17.

117
^ witneffes, every word may be eftabliAed : and ii
"he fliall negleft to hear them, tell it unto the
" church." , , ' ,
To effeft the faliitary purpofes of difcipline,
meetings, -were appointed, at an early-period of thq,
fociety, whjcli, from the times of th^ir being
held, were called Quarterly-meetings.. It was
after ward^s found expedTent (e) to divide the diftrifts
of thofe meetings, arid' to, meet more frequentiy ;
from whence arofe Monthly-meetings, fubordinatq
to thofe held quarterly. At length, in 166^9, (/).a
Yearly-meeting "was eftabliflied, to fuperintend,
aflift, and provide rules for, the whole : previoufly
to which, general meetings had been occafionally:
held. ' f _ ' .
A Monthly-meeting is ufually compofed of feve
ral particularxongr€gations,(^) fituated within a con
venient diftance frpm each other. Its bufinefs is to
provide for the fubfiftehce of the poor, and for the
education of their offspring ; to judge of the fin^n
cerity and fitnefs of perfons appearing, to be con
vinced of the religious principles of the fociety, and
defiring to be admitted into meriiberflilp; (A) to ex
cite due attention to the difcharge of religious and
moral duty ; and to deal with diforderly members.
Monthly nieetings alfo grant to fuch of their mem
bers as remove into othei: Monthly-meetings certi
ficates of their memberfhip and conduft ; without
which they carinpt gain raemberfhip in fuch meet-.
(«) Sewcl, 485. ff; Fox, 390. •
, (g.) Where this is the cafe, it is ufual for the members of each congre
gation to form what is called a Preparative meeting, becaufe its buCneft
js to prepare wliateyer may occur artiong themfelves, to be laid befdre
$he Montliiy-ineeting.
(hj^ On appljcstioi} of this kind-, a fraall committee is appointed to vifit
the party, ahd repprt to the, Monthly-meeting; which is dired:ed by our
irules not tp adiiiit, any into metnberlbip, wiJihoyt Rowing a ftafonabl*
tiaie ts collider their con4BAi

11^
ings. Each Monthly-meeting Is required to appoint
certain perfons, under the name of overfeers, who
are to rakecare that the rules ^f our difcipline be
pnt in praftice ; and when any cafe of complaint, or
diforderly conduft, comes to their knowledge, to
fee that private adftionitlbn, agreeably to ;he gpfpel
tvXt before-mentioned, be given, previoufly to its
being laid before the Monthly-meeting.
When a cafe is introduced, it is ufual for a fmall
committee to be appointed, to vifit the offender,
to ehdeavour to Convince him of his error, and to
induce him to forfake and condetnn it (f). If they
fucceed, the perfPn is by minute declared tP have
ilaade fatisfaftipn for the offence ; if not, he is dif
owned as a njembcr.pf the fociety. (k)
in dffpntes betiJFeert individuals, it has long been
the dedded judgment of the fociety, that its mem-
btrs ¦ fbouid not fu6 each other at law. It there
fore enjoins cill to end their differences by fpeedy
And Iffipartial arbitration, agreeably to rules laid
dbwti. If any refufe to adopt this mode, or, hav
ing' adoJ>ted it, to fubmit to the award, it is the
direftlpti of the Yearly-meeting that fuch be dif-

To Monthly-meetings alfo belongs the allowing
of marriages ; for our Society hath always fcrupled
fo Acknowledge the exclufive authority of the
priefts in the folemnization of marriage. Thofe
who in^elid to marry appear together and propofe
their intentipn to the Monthly-meeting ; and if not
attended by their parents and guardidus, produce
(i)"** hi* 5* f aterally done by a written acknowledgment, figned by th«
'- (*) 'rliJs t« aoSe by what is termed afeftimapy of denial: which i« »
(saper reciting the oja-ence, and fometimes the fteps which kave led to
it; hext, the means tmavailingly ufed to reclaim the offender ; after that,
a clanfc rlifowning him; to which is ufualiy added "an expreffion rf defirS
for his repentance, and for his being reftored to niemberlhip.

119
a written certificate of their confent, fignc4 In the,
prefence of witneffes. The raeqting then appoints"
a '.committee to inquire whether they be clear of
other-erigageraents refpefting marriage ; and if at
a fuhfequent meeting, to which the parties alfo
come and declare the continuance of their inten-
tlo^, no pbjeftibris be reported, they have the
meeting's confent tq folemnize their intended mar
riage. This is done in a pnblk: raeeting for wor-
ihip, towards the clofe whereof the parties ftand
up, and folemnly take each other for hufband, and
wife. A- certificate of the proceedings is then
publicly read, and figned by tlie parties, and after
wards by the relations and others as witneffes.
Of fuch marriage the Monthly-meeting keeps a
record ; as alfo of the births and burials of Its
memhers. A certificate of the date, of tfie name
of the infant, and of its parents, figned by thofe
prefent at the birth, Is the fubjeft of one of thefe
laft-mentioned records.; and ah ord^r for the in-
lerment, corintcrfigned by the grave-maker of the
other. The naming of children is without cere
mony. Burials are alfo Cond'ufte.d in a fimple
n>atrt\er. The body, followed by the relations and,
friend?, ^I^' fometimes, previouffy to Interment,
carried to a riieeting; and at the graye a paufe Is
generally made ; on both which occafions it fre-
qnendy falls out, that one or raore f>f lends prefent
havp foraevyhat ,to exprefs fot; the edification of,
thofe who attend ; bur. tip religious rite, is' coii-
fide^rtd as an,efi[ential part of t^urial.
Several IVib^thly-meeSngs tfonjiJofe a (^arteriy-
meeting. At the^arteriy-raeetirig are produced
written anfwers from the Mottthlyimeetii^|i^ to
certain qjj^ries. refpefting the c;pjodu.ft;Qf ttiefe'raera-
bers, and the meetings," care over them. The ac«

120
e'oHlits thus received, .are digefted mto one, -yphlch ,
is fent, alfo in the form pf anfwers to Queries, by '
reprefentatives, to the Yeariy-mecting. Appeals
from ,the judgment of Morithly-nieetirigs,, -arc,
Ijrought to the Quarterly-meetings ; whofe bufiT ,
nefs alfo it is to affift in any difficult cafe, or wh?re .
reraiiffnefs", appears in the care of the Monthly- -
m.eetings' over the individuals who compofe thera.
, The Yearly-meeting has the general fuperintenct-, :
ence of the Society in the country in which II Is
eftablifhed ; (/) and therefore, as the accounts which. •
it receives difcover the ftate of inferior meetings,
as particular exigencies require, or as the meeting
is impreffed v/ith a fenfe of duty, it gives forth Its
advice,^, makes fuch regulations as appear to bc
requifite, or excites to the obfervance of thofe al
ready made ;, and: fpmetimes appoints committees
to vifit thofe Quarterly-meetings which appear to
be in need of immediate advice. Appeals from the
judgment of Quarterly-meetings are here finally
deterniined ; and a brotherly porrefpondence, by
epiftles, is maintained with other Yearly-meetings.(?^)
„ In' this.pja'^e it is proper to. add, that, as we be-..
lieve women m.ay be rightly called to the work of -
the miniftry, we alfo think that, to them belongs a^
IKare in the' fupport of our Chriftian difcipline;.
aijd ihat fpirie parts of it, wherein tl^eir own fex
is, concerned, devolve pri them with, peculiar pro-. ,;
priety: accprdingly they have Monthly, Quarterly,"'
arid Yearlymeetipgs of^theirlpwn fex, held at, the .
famp. time /and in the fame,' place with, tli^pTe ofthe
men; but feparately, aiid -without the poveer 6f-
(/) Therfr^ are feven- Yearly-meitings, viz. I liondotfe-.to which come
Reprefentatives from Ireland, 2 New-England,- 3 New-Yorlt., 4 Penn
fylvania and New Jerfey, J Maryland-, 6 Virginia',- 7 The Carolina? and -
*5s^g'»-.:':' .'n^.rit . ... ., ..: •.¦...: .-,,., ^:;. :.•.:- i-^^o
(m) See the laft ilote.

121
making rules : and it may be remarked that during
the perfecutions, which in the laft century oc
cafioned the imprifonraent of fo many of the men,
the care of the poor often fell on the women, and
was by them fatisfaftorily adminiftered.
In order that thofe who are in the fituation pf
minifters raay have the tender fyrapathy and counfel
of thofe of either fex, («) who, by their experience
in the work of religion, are quafified for that fer
vice, the Monthly-meetings are advifed to feleft
fuch under the denomination of Elders. Thefe, and
minifters approved by their Monthly-meetings, (o)
have meetings pecufiar to themfelves, called Meet
ings of Minifters and Elders ; in which they have
an opportunity of exciting each other to a difcharge
of their feveral duties, and of extending advice to
thofe who may appear .to be weak, without any
needlefs expofure. Such meetings are generally
held in the compafs of each Monthly, Quarterly,
and Yeariy-raeeting. They are condufted by rules
prefcribed by the Yearly-meeting, and have no
authority to make any alteration or addition to
•them. The members of them'- unite with their
brethren in the Meetings for difcipfine, and are
equally accountable to the latter for their conduft.
It is to a meeting of this kind in Lond9n, caUed
the Second-day's Morning-meeting, that the revifal
of manufcripts concerning our principles, pre
vioufly to publication, is intrufted by the Yearly-
meeting held in London ; and alfo the granting,
(«) Fox, 461, 49a-
(0) Thofe who believe themfelves required to fpeak in meetings for wor
fhip, are not immediately acknowledged as minifters by their Monthly-
meetings; but time is taken for judgment, that the meeting may be fatis-
fied of their call and qualification. It will alfo fqmetimes happen, that
fuch as/ are not approved, will obtrude themfelves as minifters, to the
grief of their brethren ; but much forbearance is ufed towards thefe^ be
fore the difapprobation of the meeting is publicly teftified.
I

122
in the Intervals of the Yearly-meeting, of cer
tificates of approbation to fuch minifters as are con
cerned to travel in the work of the miniftry in
foreign parts ; in addition to thofe granted by their
Monthly and Quarterly meetings.. When a vifit of
this kind doth not extend beyond Great Britain, a
certificate frora the Monthly n\eeting of which the
minifter is a member is fufllcient ; if to Ireland, the
concurrence of the Quarterly raeeting is alfo- re
quired. Regulations of firailar tendency obtain in
other Yearly raeetings.
The Yeariy-raeeting of London, in the year
1675, appointed a meeting to be held in that city,
for the purpofe of advifing and affifting in cafes of
fuffering for confcience fake, which hath continued
with great ufe to the fociety to this day. It Is
compofed of friends under the name of correfpond-
ents^ chofen by the feveral Quarterly-meetings,
and who refide in or near the city. The fame
meetings alfo appoint merabers of their own in the
country as correfpondents, who are, to join their
brethren in London on eraergency. The naraes of
all thefe correfpondents, previoufly to their being
recorded as fuch, are fubraitted to the approbation
of the Yeariy-raeeting. Thofe of the raen who arc
approved rainifters are alfo raerabers of.this raeet
ing, which Is called the Meeting for Sufferings ; a
narae arifing frora its original purpofe, which is not
yet becorae entirely obfolete.
The Yearly-meeting has intrufted the Meeting.
for Sufferings with the care of printing and dif-
tributing books, and with the management of its
ftock; (y) and, eonfidered as a ftanding committee of
(t) This is an occafional voluntary contribution, expended in printing
books,— houfe-rent for a clerk, and his wages for keeping records —the
paifage of minifters who vifit their brethren beyond fea, — and fome fmall
incidental charges.

123
the Yeariy-raeeting, Jt hath a general care of what
ever may arife, during the internals of that meet
ing, affefting the fociety, and requiring imraediate
attention : particularly of thofe clrcuraftances which
, may occafion an application to Governraent.
There is not in any of the raeetings which have
been mentioned, any prefident, as we believe that
Divine Wifdom alone ought to prefide ; nor hath
any member a right to claim pre-eminence over the
reft. The ofl[ice of clerk, with a few exceptions,
is undertaken voluntarily by fome raember ; as is
alfo the keeping of the records; Where thefe are
very voluminous, and require a houfe for their
depofit (as is the cafe in London, where the ge
neral records of the fociety in Great Britain are
kept,) a clerk is hired to 'have the care of thera ;
but except a few clerks of this kind, and perfons
who have the care of meeting-houfes, none receive
any ftipend or gratuity for their fervices in our
religious fociety.
Thus have we given a view of the foundation
and eftablifhraent of our difcipline ; by which it
will be feen, that it is not (as hath been frequently
; infinuated) raerely the work of raodern tiraes ; but
was the early care and concern of our pious pre
deceffors. "We cannot better clofe this fhort flcetch
of it, .than by obferving, that if the exercife of
difcipline fhould in forae inftances appear to prefs
hard upon thofe, who, neglefting the raonitions of
divine counfel in their hearts, are alfo unwilling- to
be accountable to their brethren ; yet, if that great,
leading, and indifpenfable rule, enjoined by our
Lord, be obferved by thofe who undertake to be
aftive in It, " Whatfoever ye would that men
" fliould do to you, do ye even fo to them," (q)
{q) Matt. vii. IJ.
12

124
It will prevent the cenfure of the church frow
Tfalllng on any*. thing but that which really obftrufts*
the progrefs of' Truth. * Difcipfine will then pro
mote, M"iih eminent degree, that love of our
neig^pjOHr, which Ivthe mark of difciplefhip, and
without Which a profeffion of love td God, and to
Ihjls'caUfe, is a vain pretence. " He," faid the be
loved difdple, " that loveth not his,%roth^ whorri-
" he hath feen, how can he love God whom he
"hath not feen? And this corama|idinent have- we
«' from him, that he who loveth God, lolre his
«;brOtl^er alfo." (r)
Cr) I'Johniv. ao. SI.

FINIS.

london: Printed by Wm. Phillip s.'George Yard, Lombard Streetr

3 9002 00961 9561

B46S

• iiai4ki-