kerism confirmed" is a bare repetition of former assertions. Not an argument of Brown has been weakened. Besides, Brown's quarto was published in the close of the year 1678. Barclay's reply (which has sunk into oblivion,) must have been posterior to this. It could not have been seen by Brown; for while Barclay was admitted into the presence of Charles II, and was even gaining favours for his sect,* Brown perished in A. D. 1679, by a lingering disease, on a foreign shore; whither the cruelty of that persecuting tyrant and his brother, had pursued him. But the result determines on whose side the victory lies. The Quakers were defeated; and even at this day, while they form a respectable portion of the population of England and America, there are only a few in the kingdom of Scotland, and even these few are decreasing.t § 15. On the continent of Europe, the society gained, at an early day, a firm footing among the Protestants. Two causes operated greatly in its favour. It was there that the sect of the Mystics had widely diffused itself; and Pope Innocent XI, shortly after A. D. 1676, had issued his bull against Molinists and Quietists; and as the thunder of the vatican had always a fiery bolt accompanying it, many of these people were driven from the Catholic countries, to take shelter under the liberty enjoyed by Protestant Europe. These carried with them the seeds of the Quaker principles. Combining their efforts, these sects reaped plentiful harvest in Holland and Germany.§ § 16. The Friends were introduced on the continent of America by the celebrated William Penn. Under his fostering care and wise policy, they have grown up to be a powerful body. These differ considerably from the European Quakers. There are two prominent parts in their character, in which this differ Bar. life p. 33, &c. edition of A. D. 1805. † Mr. Ward's preface to Brown's book, "the Swan Song :" and preface to Brown on the Romans. Also Cruikshank's hist. vol. i ch. IV. and XI. "Of the society of Quakers in Scotland," says Sir John Carr, in A. D. 1808, "there are only between one hundred and one hundred and fifty, above seventeen years of age." Caledonian sketches, ch. 8, ad finem. § Germany has, of all countries, been the most fertile in enthusiasm. Sleidan asserts that, to his knowledge, there had appeared forty thousand pretenders to prophecy. Comment. lib. v. ance is marked. First, They are not known to have exhibited many of those indecencies and frantic follies, into which the cruelty of persecution drove their early English brethren. And second, Availing themselves of their liberty, and their distance from the opposition carried on against their sect in Europe, they have propagated the early opinions of the society, with a license, in which no European Quaker could persuade himself to indulge.* § 17. There are three periods in the Quaker history. The first is the Foxonian. This period is distinguished by the obscu rity of their ideas, and the outrageous disorders of their public conduct. Their doctrines were not drawn from the Scriptures; they were not tangible to reason. Their "Christ within" was taken by some of them, in a manner natural enough, for Christ within them literally. This led them into excesses in speech, and in practices. It became a favourite topic with them, to deny the necessity of the gospel history of the sufferings and death of our Lord. They affirmed, that those who had it not, may be saved, as well as those who do have it. Others even denied that there was any other Christ, and any other sufferings of Christ than those which are within ;§ nor were their excesses in practice less frantic. Toldervy and Naylor, and Milner are melancholy instances of what befel not a few. Believing that Christ dwelt in them as he did in him who was crucified on Calvary, Naylor accepted of divine homage, and was led into Bristol on horseback, (in the absence of an ass), while they shouted hosannahs to that Son of God. Toldervy having put himself through a form of crucifixion, covered himself in a paper winding sheet; lay three quarters of an hour (a quarter for a day,) and having risen "by the mighty power of God," he ran over fields and ditches into a Quaker meeting, and proclaimed that Christ was risen, and was now come to commission twelve of them to preach the gospel to the dark *What these opinions are, we shall see presently. See Keith's " Deism of W. Penn" and the life of Custer, who was an eye-witness, in Philadelphia, of the Keithian controversy. And Mosh. Eccl. Hist. vol. v. cent. 17, part 2, sect. 2, ch. 4. See a pamphlet, entitled "Hell broke loose ;" and Hongill's reply, "the mouth of the pit stopped;" and Penn ii. 75. + Dr. Owen on Trinity, Ed. 1798, p. 78. See Smith's Primer for Quaker children, p. 8, and Mosh. vol. v. c. 17, part ii. sect. 2. From the "difficulty," Hume thinks, " of finding an ass in Bristol!" world.* This whole period is marked by scenes of disorder. The leading Quakers strolled about, and burst into churches during the divine service; interrupting the worship, and insulting the ministry. They spoke contemptuously of the Holy Scriptures, and of all the divine ordinances. This period extends from about A. D. 1645 to A. D. 1660. In the second period, the society appears to more advantage. Their conduct is more orderly, and their tenets begin to be reduced to a system. This was the fruit of the labours of Penn, Keith, and other distinguished leaders; and being reduced to the form of a system, they appeared in their true light. "The Quakers," said a cotemporary of Penn," who have for a long season hovered about like a swarm of flies, begin now to settle down in the opinions lately by them declared for."‡ Penn was, to say the least, a Sabellian. He rejected the holy doctrine of three distinct persons in the Godhead. He admitted that there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit; but he taught that these are the same. He appears, at other times, to breathe the spirit of a Socinian. He quotes and applauds the idea of Crellius, "that the Holy Spirit is the power and efficacy of God;" which enters into man, and is the same thing as divine inspiration§. In his "sandy foundation," Penn has engrafted on his mystic system, these tenets in their most virulent forms. Even Priestley's zeal meets a rival here. Even Hume, and the poet of Ferney are not more violent against the atonement of our Lord. His belief on these fundamental articles was suspected at an early period. The suspicion was excited at a public dispute at the Spital in London. He there opposed, for the first time, the doctrine of the Trinity. This drew the attention of the Socinians. A leader of that sect applauded his labours, and courted his friendship. When his "sandy foundation" appeared, the fears of * Toldervy's book, "Foot out of the Snare." See this curious production in Phil, Library, Miscell. 4to. No. 927. See Besse, Hist. ii. 2, 3, Sewel Hist. i. p. 246. Fox's Great Myst. p. 298, edit. of 1659. † Fox in vol. i. Jour. gives a detail of instances. Snake in the Grass, edit. 3, p. 104. This author challenged the society to produce a genuine passage from their writings, previous to the year 1660; which speaks with reverence of the Holy Scriptures. No one, so far as I can discover, has ventured to take up the glove. Dr. Owen on the Trinity, edit. 1798, p. 78. See Crellius" of the One God," p. 197, and Penn ii, pp. 109, 110. the christian public were confirmed; and its indignation was turned against the Quakers as a Socinian sect. The warmth of their allies was increased; they were preparing the bonds of union. The Quakers and Socinians were about to gird on their armour in the common cause. But Penn was a Mystic; and his system was not yet completed. While confined in the Tower, and awaiting his trial under the charge of blasphemy, he continued to make additions to it. He wrote his "innocence with open face," an apology for the sentiments of his first piece. He avows that "he had not budged one jot," from the opinions of the "sandy foundation." He applauds Socinus, as one who had clearer prospects of the truth than the most of his cotemporaries ;* then approaching the point in dispute, he confesses "the divinity of Christ." He admits that there are three in the Godhead. His Socinian allies viewed him with amazement. They accused him of gross contradiction. He denied the persons of the trinity, and yet advocated their divinity. They turned from him with disgust; they refused their fellowship to his sect; but this meagre explanation gained Penn his liberty, and his assertion was true. He had not "budged one jot." That Christ, whose divinity he advocates, is their "light within." It is divine, because it is merely God in his enlightening power; and the third, the spirit, is God in another of his functions.† What inconsistencies are crowded into human character! Penn had, with daring hand, impugned the holiest doctrines of christianity; he had even engrafted on his mystic principles the deism of Lord Herbert. The church, and all good men are in tears. They bewail the impiety of this man; while he, in his cell, under the accusation of blasphemy, consoles himself in his sufferings for Christ; and with great humility, enrols himself in the list of martyrs; and writes his "no Cross, no Crown!! The christian world asks, what is that cross of Penn, without which there is no Penn, vol. i. p. 268. + Compare his "sandy foundations" and his "innocency with open face," in vol. i. of his works. + This writer, in his treatise " De Religione Gentilum," lays down five articles, which he supposes to embrace all that is necessary to salvation. He excludes the peculiar doctrines of the bible. His articles are, he says, of universal application. This deism Penn embodies into his system. See his "Christ. Quak." ch. 7, 8, 10, 11-See Keith's deism of W. Penn, and Vincent's review of the "Sandy Foundation," written by Penn. crown? It is a cross of suffering, from the indignation of the christian public, levelled against blasphemy of a peculiar and deep aggravation! Yes. Let the christian world remember, that it was in these circumstances, in this medley of impiety and martyrdom, that this book was composed, by this most singular and most deluded man !* The third period is that of Barclay. He appeared at a time when the keenest opposition was carried on against the society. The principles of Penn, which his influence had spread widely in the society, had kindled a furious flame against them in England. Barclay undertakes to give the world the most correct picture of their tenets. He moulded the system of mysticism into a new form; and drawing a veil over the Socinianism of his compatriots, he has compressed over the whole, the prominent features of the Arminian and the Pelagian heresy.t § 18. There was a gradual amalgamation of the heterogenous sentiments of these three periods. This process took place under the strong pressure of the public opinion against them; excited and strengthened by very able writers. The society, led on by Penn and Barclay, certainly did recede from the more mystic sentiments of Fox; yet it was a retreat, conducted with the face towards the enemy. This needs little proof. We have only to look into Penn's first works, which appeared about the year 1668, especially his sandy foundation," and compare them with the wonderful concessions in his pieces, written between the years 1692 and 1698; particularly his "Key," and his "Reply to the bishop of Cork." There is as great a difference between the opinions of these two periods, as there is between the young Penn, the dashing and thoughtless son of admiral Penn, and William Penn, in the full flowing uniform of the society; advancing with cautious steps, and a suspicious eye thrown on all around him, and bowing beneath the storm of public opinion. Barclay's talents, enriched with the knowledge of the Roman fathers, which certainly bear a near affinity to the modifications of Arminius, reformed the Quaker system still more. The authors of the "Brief Apology" * It is obvious that I speak of Penn as a sectarian leader, and a polemic Hadhe confined himself to politics, his fame had been entire. † See his Theses, and the Prop. of the Apol. Dublin ed. of 1727. |